what did you say , i did say i was maybe misquoting you.. refresh my memery ?. Pot - kettle - black This false pretext is what i realy wish you to explain..i can understand about the other evidence not being correct , but this is viewed with hindsight, i can't see its possible and if it is show me were you found the evidence to support that you were aware their was no WMD .. stating now as a fact is fair enough , but all i wish is to be shown were you got your information from.. why is this such a hard thing for you to answer. just saying the 'truths out there' (as it were) means little because i can find endless amounts of information, i am asking for yours ...not the vast resource of the net. Yes ok, so why are you discussing it with me..realy , yes i differ in my beliefs, but i am asking to be swayed .. maybe why i hang around liberal websites i guess. convince me. And don't go on about personal opinions. After the fact , and a matter of opinion. an opinion i keep asking you to show me. I don't mean to be petulant , but soon i may just think you can't show me...again not prove , just show ? so i can make up my own mind. Yes but i don't think its about oil , and don't think it would be a sufficient reason to invade. Widely accepted , is this not what i am trying to say . with taking people like Mr annans point of view as evidence. for every claim their is a counter claim . You can't have personal opinion and create a fact. so realy your the the wrong person to be debating with, i prefer those people that had pre knowledge that this war was wrong . comeing to your conclusions after the fact is a bit ?. but i did theat i guess. so i can't moan about that. Its people that seem to have had a vission of this war being wrong from the get go..this is the people i am intrested in. Its a dossier based on opinions and information recieved . be they lies or misrepresentation. It was a dicision. I am very inrtrested in this false pretext, because this is what i have problems with. You can't use information after the fact (after the war started) to back up claims that could or could not have been true. thanks for adding a bit of your original points of view rather than dissecting my post.
i did not realise..it tends to happen when i carry on after him ...see i bet my writing is small now. i will remember that .
Yeah, it is. Verdana is a much nicer looking font anyway. Dr.A seems to specialise in the text equivalent of shouting people down and poisoning the well, which is all well and shit if you're just ranting at your mates, but is totally unnecessary and rather arrogant when used on an on-line forum. The idea is to encourage mature and civilised debate, yet the guy just drags in all the things that serve to prevent valid debate in the real world. And he appears to have had his sense of humour removed.
Well I don't know about you, but none of my friends take 15 minutes to make a point. And conversations tend to be two way things. ... but promotes it as a place of debate, rather than just a series of statements. Well that doesn't make much sense, does it? Surely if I wanted attention, I'd make shorter posts that had half a chance of getting read, rather than long ones that probably bore half the forum to sleep? As I said, you're just out to be insulting. Which seems far more like attention-grabbing behaviour to me. Awww, c'mon! If you're gonna be insulting, at least have the courage to stand by your insults! Didn't you say "I thought you were both self-important dicks"? I'm sure you could criticise someone without the need to call them a 'dick'? Oh don't talk such shite. If a stranger walked up to you and called you a dick, would you think they were critical or abusive? Coming from someone that's wandered into a thread and started hurling insults around, you'll forgive me if I don't take that comment to heart. That hurts. No, what's actually sad is criticisng something so petty as a font. Perhaps you'll develop more important priorities as you get older.
I still keep waiting for a glimmer hope with the humour thing..he amuses himself .. and other people think he is funny (apparently) but i realy just think it would make him human rather than a cold calculated debater...sayin that i think its just me though .
I asked why, as someone who holds fairly right-wing opinions, you frequent a forum that's mainly left-wing. This wasn't a suggestion that you shouldn't post here. It was genuine curiosity. Nice response, Matthew. Very well articulated argument. It doesn't matter whether it's hindight or not. We were taken to war for reasons that proved to be incorrect. Even if you're generous enough to assume that this was an honest mistake, then it's still not good enough. If you take a country to war, you should be damn sure of your facts. Whether it was a mistake or whether it was intentional, the pretext of the war was still false. It's not hard. It's time consuming. I've been reading about Iraq for the last 14 years. And you expect me to spend my time compiling all that information into a convenient list for you? But it is about personal opinions. Some people will say that the deaths cause by the war are too high a price for liberating Iraq. Others will say they're a price worth paying. Some people will say that the war will destabilise the middle-east. Others will say that ultimately Iraq will be a beacon for democracy in the region. None of these positions can be conclusively proven. All you can do is persue the available evidence and decide what you believe to be correct. This is why I've consistently said that I'm not arrogant on this issue - I accept that there's a case to be made on either side of the debate. Already covered this earlier in post. Uhhhh... I think you're agreing with me? I had an opinion before the war. I didn't think it was jsutified. But again.... this is an opinion. And opinions aren't fact. Well it's a bit of a coincidence that most rational people didn't regard Iraq as a threat, isn't it? But regardless, as I've already said...... the war was still fought under a false pretext. Oh grow up. Is your argument coming down to my choice of font now? (one which Sal also uses, btw) ...... and this, coming from the person criticising my choice of font! Hilarious! And you think I have no sense of humour
Dr.A, you commenced the thread by asking who comes across as a dick. You have since said you're never going to meet any of these people. So you're doing exactly the same: insulting strangers. I think you break down all the posts into bits because if you put all your reponses to the post into proximity, people would notice how petty and contradictory they are. And if even you think it's boring and no-one will bother to read it, why do it? Because you're a dick? Or for some other reason?
...... who started out by sending me insulting PMs. Still just throwing out random insults I see? I think you insult people because you have a personality disorder and need to boost your self-esteem by being abusive. But hey, that's just my opinion This is brilliant. So one minute you're criticising me on the basis that I'm supposedly attempting to attract attention, and now you're criticising me because I'm not attempting to attract attention? You need to be consistent if you're to retain the slightes shred of credibility.
There's obviously a happy medium between trotting out tedious reams of text that even you think are boring, and craving attention. If you consider saying anything that anyone might be interested in reading to be attention-seeking, surely this entire forum is below contempt. I've noticed this before, you seem to regard opinions as polar opposites, with no possibility of middle ground. And if I'm hurling insults then so are you. You've shown a slight deviation from my opinion, therefore I am insulted that you don't concur with me. I have hurled the odd insult at you, but only because you deserve it.
Well which is it you're accusing me of? Attention seeking or being boring? Or both? Coz it seems to me you're more interested in just insulting me than actually discussing anything. Show's how little you actually know about me and just how unfounded your criticisms are then. If you'd been paying attention, you'd have noticed how I've frequently pointed out in this forum that the turth is usualy found in the grey area between polarised extremes. You might also have noticed how I've repeatedly said that I don't believe my opposition to the war in Iraq to be a matter of absolute fact, but rather a matter of personal opinion. Oh right, that's OK then. Thanks for clearing that up. You've clearly demonstrated the maturity of your position.
I accused you of attention seeking. You said you were boring. With regards to the rest of the post, I like the way you think I should've researched all your previous post in depth, to get a better idea of your character and views, rather than just going on the fact that you've posted God knows how many times on a thread entirely of your own invention to say that people are mean to you, not realising (or not caring) that you're just giving people more reason to do so. You gave the impression that you don't care much about people on the board who you are never going to meet, so why are you so worked up about a PM that you can easily ignore, and probably block? This thread is really dull by the way, I'm appauled that I've stuck with it this long, so god knows how crap you must be.
...... which you seemed to be agreeing with. Hardly. I simply think it's a bad idea to start making sweeping generalisations about someone, especially when they're so clearly at odds with the facts. Well I doubt you care very much about me or my opinion, so why are you having this debate with me? Dude, that hurts. Really. I'm...... crap? That's nearly as harsh as when you criticised my choice of font
Why do people always blame me when they can't resist posting?!? Hang on..... please ignore me.... I think I might be attention seeking.....
Not realy right wing i don't think ?. surely if you had come to the same conclussion as me, you would be a little right wing as well. But i am so thick i don't understand all this left wing right wing mumbo jumbo. Surely it does not matter. I did not think mmm i can't think that way because it would conflict with my political persuasion (not that i swing either way in particular, whatever that means). Thanks No, not all, just a bit. I don't like people dying, but a body count is no way to judge if its a good or bad endeavour. I don't think i could be as as cold to say its a price worth paying, i just question who is doing the killing and their motives, we are trying to get rid of the insurgency, that has prety much alighned itself with al-qaeda No opinions are not facts, but this is what i have been trying to get out of you, so you have not wavered, You just can see that their are a multitude of variation of opinions. I know your bored with me bringing up this but anyway http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2948068.stm It has everything to do with the resolutions broken. and a little to do with the inteligence. Like i was saying from the start, why are these not questioned in anyway. no one wishes for apologies for these that saddam broke. You i think bring up morality, quite a bit. surely that does not actualy matter when or is slightly meaningless as a arguement when you consider what saddam got away with. Mr Bin ladens plans. The overthrow of the godless regimes and their replacement with an Islamic regime. Other missions consist of the following: 1. Gathering information about the enemy, the land, the installations, and the neighbors. 2. Kidnaping enemy personnel, documents, secrets, and arms. 3. Assassinating enemy personnel as well as foreign tourists. 4. Freeing the brothers who are captured by the enemy. 5 .Spreading rumors and writing statements that instigate people against the enemy. 6. Blasting and destroying the places of amusement, immorality, and sin; not a vital target. 7. Blasting and destroying the embassies and attacking vital economic centers. 8 .Blasting and destroying bridges leading into and out of the cities. Importance of the Military Organization: 1. Removal of those personalities that block the call's path. [A different and writing:] All types of military and civilian intellectuals and thinkers for the state. 2 .Proper utilization of the individuals' unused capabilities. 3 .Precision in performing tasks, and using collective views on completing a job from all aspects, not just one. 4. Controlling the work and not fragmenting it or deviating from it. 5. Achieving long-term goals such as the establishment of an Islamic state and short term goals such as operations against enemy individuals and sectors. 6. Establishing the conditions for possible confrontation with the regressive regimes and their persistence. 7. Achieving discipline in secrecy and through tasks. al-qaeda and all its splinter groups, one of wich has been doing a nice job of killing iraqi and people helping with the reconstruction....have questionable maoralities of their own.
