Bush supporters' aftermath thread II

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

I didn't learn that in the Universities I attended.

You studied history and politiial sciences as well?

Actually, we learn that at school. Studying such at universities is bit more complex. :wink:

0 Replies

Be careful Walter. I've been advised (by some) that such anecdotal evidence is not to be presented as nobody can know whether it is true or not.

0 Replies

I#m not speaking about any anecdotal evidence at all whne I refer to the (scientific) term of "source".

0 Replies

I also failed to see a link referring to the use of terrorism to conquer Germany.

And this

Quote:

I will concede that both the German and Russian takeovers produced more terrorism after the takeover than what preceded it. But if you delve into the details of history, you find the seeds of terrorism at work:

You wouldn't interpret this to mean that the takeover of Germany and Russia were not, in fact, products of terrorism?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

<looks>

<ignores>

Pelosi no shoo-in for job as speaker

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's prospects for becoming the nation's first female House speaker depend not only on a Democratic victory in November but also on her ability to prevent any Democrats from voting against her -- primarily centrists opposed to her liberal stances.

Continued...

look at cartoon you posted, mcg

hypocrite

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I also failed to see a link referring to the use of terrorism to conquer Germany.

And this

Quote:

I will concede that both the German and Russian takeovers produced more terrorism after the takeover than what preceded it. But if you delve into the details of history, you find the seeds of terrorism at work:

You wouldn't interpret this to mean that the takeover of Germany and Russia were not, in fact, products of terrorism?

Cycloptichorn

No. The fact that most terrorist activities occurred after the takeover does not extrapolate into no terrorist activites occurring before the takeover. If you read all the links I provided today, you would see that.

0 Replies

Here Walter. Post 2326684 -

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I also failed to see a link referring to the use of terrorism to conquer Germany.

And this

Quote:

I will concede that both the German and Russian takeovers produced more terrorism after the takeover than what preceded it. But if you delve into the details of history, you find the seeds of terrorism at work:

You wouldn't interpret this to mean that the takeover of Germany and Russia were not, in fact, products of terrorism?

Cycloptichorn

No. The fact that most terrorist activities occurred after the takeover does not extrapolate into no terrorist activites occurring before the takeover. If you read all the links I provided today, you would see that.

I asked Okie to name a country which was conquered using terrorism. Neither Russia nor Germany was conquered using terrorism. So I really don't see how your point stands in either example. You certainly haven't provided any evidence that it did, merely asserted that it did.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Here Walter. Post 2326684 -

I've looked at that post

Pantalones wrote:

I was raised a catholic, changed to an agnostic in my mid-teens.

I'm a politics ignorant, mostly because neither of my parents have strong political views and are not tied to a political party. I've just recently started to pick minimum political awareness and starting to form an opinion but don't have one just yet.

So I'm not sure where I should've vote in the poll. I picked other.

I really don't get how it is related to this topic and/or your claim that Germany was conquered by terrorism.

0 Replies

Wrong post. Try again Walter. I copied and pasted it from my specific post.

http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2326684#2326684

0 Replies

ad 1) your link doesn't work here,
ad 2) I sincerely doubt that the "New Times, a monthly digest of russian weekly Novoe Vremya" can be quoted as a generally accepted source re German history.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Wrong post. Try again Walter. I copied and pasted it from my specific post.

http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2326684#2326684

Here's another piece talking about the tactics of the Brown Shirts prior to Hitler's rise to power. http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Brown+Shirt

0 Replies

Perhaps, Foxfyre, you are not aware
a) that I am a Germa,
b) that I live in Germany,
c) that I studied history
d) that I got one of my degrees with a thesis related to the rise/fall of the Nazis.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Perhaps, Foxfyre, you are not aware

0 Replies

Walter wrote:

a) that I am a Germa

Sounds like some microscopic creature from Italy

0 Replies

gustavratzenhofer wrote:

Walter wrote:
a) that I am a Germa

Sounds like some microscopic creature from Italy

That's me in reality Embarrassed

:wink:

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Perhaps, Foxfyre, you are not aware
a) that I am a Germa,
b) that I live in Germany,
c) that I studied history
d) that I got one of my degrees with a thesis related to the rise/fall of the Nazis.

Then fine Walter. You tell me that Hitler's rise to power was one of pacifism, peace, love, and kindness and I'll believe you. I have no doubt that you know more about German history than I do. If you say that Hitler and his thugs did no violence to Jews, Communists, and others who opposed them on his rise to power, I will accept that as your heartfelt and informed opinion and conclude that my other sources are absolutely wrong.

Like I said, whatever floats your boat. (And I wonder if Setanta will excoriate you as he has me for once concluding that I was reasonably well educated? And whether Revel will accept your anecdotal references when I was advised that mine were not valid because they couldn't be proved?)

0 Replies

I don't accept WH's anecdotal evidence as proof that you are wrong, Fox, for the record. You have done well enough on your own that it is uneccessary.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I don't accept WH's anecdotal evidence as proof that you are wrong, Fox, for the record. You have done well enough on your own that it is uneccessary.

Cycloptichorn

As opposed to you who rarely ever has any support for his opinions interspersed with ad hominems because you don't have anything else to offer?

0 Replies

I'm referring to nothing else than to Foxfyre's use of terrorism to conquer Germany.

I don't think that my primary sources are anecdotal evidence. Neither do other historians.

0 Replies

Bush supporters' aftermath thread II

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know