Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:39 pm
@Frank Apisa,
There's never any reason for your name-calling, you low-life scum bag. Don't tell me what to write--you're not bright enough and you're not honest enough.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:41 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

You just can't deal with criticism, hence the name-calling, which is about as good as it gets when you attempt to debate people who are better-informed than you are. Everyone is ignorant--you, me, Olivier, Izzy--but you're so pigheaded that you can't admit it. You're a pathetic case.

Do some more name-calling, it's about the only reliable debating technique you have.


"Pigheaded." "Pathetic case." Lovely compliments; no name calling for sure.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:41 pm
@timur,
Quote:
A government is not a nationality..

Good point timur. However I think Frank implied government...unless I am mistaken
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:42 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Setanta wrote:

So we're basically back at the pot-kettle situation, the tu quoque fallacy. That's not surprise. The United States has not shown any more restraint than any other "great power." Frank's just too ignorant to know that, and completely unwilling to admit his ignorance, or to cure it.


I am not ignorant, Jabba...I am merely sharing my opinion that we are not abusing our great power more than any other great power of the past.

And yes...according to t he books, the Hutt's were not as restrained in their use of power as we.


The modus operandi was different. Prior great powers colonized, and plundered. We make trading partners with perhaps a special deal? We are using capitalism for obtaining what we need. Priviously, it was colonize and plunder. How can anyone argue that difference?


Easy! You just argue it.

In fact, you are doing it right here.

0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:44 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

There's never any reason for your name-calling, you low-life scum bag. Don't tell me what to write--you're not bright enough and you're not honest enough.


"Low-life scum bag." Now that's not name calling.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:47 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

The modus operandi was different. Prior great powers colonized, and plundered. We make trading partners with perhaps a special deal?


How do half a million dead Iraqis fit in to your trading partner theory?
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:48 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

There's never any reason for your name-calling, you low-life scum bag. Don't tell me what to write--you're not bright enough and you're not honest enough.


If you don't mind, Jabba...I prefer Mr. Low-life Scum Bag!
panzade
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:51 pm
@Foofie,
Ok, so we colonized Iraq and Afghanistan? What are you saying?
Oh yeah we made them trading partners. Wait we're using capitalism to obtain oil?
I'm confused
panzade
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:53 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I prefer Mr. Low-life Scum Bag!

I believe Apisa has acquired a nickname Laughing
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 01:54 pm
@panzade,
panzade wrote:

Ok, so we colonized Iraq and Afghanistan? What are you saying?
Oh yeah we made them trading partners. Wait we're using capitalism to obtain oil?
I'm confused

Capitalism pays for what it wants. Colonialism plunders for what it wants. We did not colonize Iraq and Afghanistan.
panzade
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:07 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
We did not colonize Iraq and Afghanistan.

No **** Dr. Watson but you made a teensy little error amidst a slight mistake.
Capitalism plunders what it wants. These invasions were just another plundering expedition.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:09 pm
@panzade,
Foofie seems to have this overpowering desire to let everyone know he's a ******* idiot, but you think that he might try thinking things through first. Just for once.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:29 pm
@panzade,
If, as this thread pretend to do, we gona compare very different powers at very different eras faced with very different problems and having to meet very different expectations, and if we're going to pretend it's not a terminally anachronistic, apples-&-oranges comparison to do, we might as well compare the US troops behavior in Iraq or Afghanistan with the British troops behavior in, say, their American colonies. What's wrong with that, other than the apples-and-oranges issue applicable to the entire thread?
panzade
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:35 pm
@timur,
Quote:
A government is not a nationality..

It would help if you addressed the poster.
I did indeed err by misusing the word nationality. I should have written government
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:40 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Hey Olivier...wass happenin'?

I'm good. Having fun asking silly historical questions. Following on your footsteps as usual... Smile

Quote:
If you disagree...fine.

Cool!

Quote:
You have mentioned that you live in France, Olivier...but I don't remember you mentioning your nationality.

I must have said it two dozen times already. I'm French...

You must be the only poster on A2K not entirely raptured by my Gallic charms yet.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:43 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

If, as this thread pretend to do, we gona compare very different powers at very different eras faced with very different problems and having to meet very different expectations, and if we're going to pretend it's not a terminally anachronistic, apples-&-oranges comparison to do, we might as well compare the US troops behavior in Iraq or Afghanistan with the British troops behavior in, say, their American colonies. What's wrong with that, other than the apples-and-oranges issue applicable to the entire thread?


I musta missed the part about apples and oranges.

The issue is the use of might by mighty nations.

All mighty nations seem to have wielded their superior powers...and at times have done so with almost no restraint at all.

It is my opinion that the US has shown more relative restraint as one of the foremost powers (perhaps THE foremost power) than previous nations have shown.

Not sure why some of you think this to be an inappropriate comparison...but I think it is entirely appropriate...and reasonable.

I certainly thank those of you who think it to be a waste of time and something not worthy of response...for your responses and contributions.

Let's keep it going.
panzade
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:46 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
What's wrong with that,

Nothing wrong with that. The writer William Dalrymple says of the first Anglo-Afghan War:
Quote:
The war cost £15m—about £50 billion ($80 billion) in today’s money—and the lives of 40,000 people, 50,000 camels and at least one cat. That is still a bargain compared with the current conflict, which costs America more than $100 billion every year.

Are you telling me that Parliament wouldn't have used drones if they had been available? Just how much time-shifting are we talking about here?
0 Replies
 
timur
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:47 pm
@Olivier5,
But, according to your avatar, you should fit this description:

Quote:
His father is an English sailor, a native of Tintagel, Cornwall. His mother is a gypsy from Seville. His parents met in Gibraltar, where his mother was known by the name of “La niña of Gibraltar” and seemed to have been a model for the painter Ingres


And he was born in La Valetta, Malta.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:48 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Hey Olivier...wass happenin'?

I'm good. Having fun asking silly historical questions. Following on your footsteps as usual... Smile


Great.

Quote:
Quote:
If you disagree...fine.

Cool!


Double cool! Wink

Quote:
Quote:
You have mentioned that you live in France, Olivier...but I don't remember you mentioning your nationality.

I must have said it two dozen times already. I'm French...


Ahhh. I must not have been listening the two dozen times you mentioned it. I looked at your home page...and did not see it there either.

Thank you for clearing that up.

Quote:
You must be the only poster on A2K not entirely raptured by my Gallic charms yet.


Ohhh...what makes you suppose I am not enraptured by your Gallic charm, Olivier.

I just did not realize the charm was Gallic...but I surely noticed it was charm.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2014 02:51 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Not sure why some of you think this to be an inappropriate comparison...but I think it is entirely appropriate...and reasonable.

And I think if King George had dealt with the American rebels with the same 'restraint' shown by US troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, history would remember George Washington as a guy with a black hood on his head.

But I understand that you might disagree with that... Fine!
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » IS AMERICA A BULLY?
  3. » Page 18
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 06:38:27