97 replies to this topic

[Phil]

I guess I'll soon come over to your house with a gun in my hand, take over your bed, steal your food, throw garbage on your floor, destroy your furniture and when you try to kick me out, I'll be "forced to defend myself and use violence".

Notice anything disturbing in your logic?

Edited by Dark Lord of the Sith, 09 August 2008 - 11:40 PM.
Added some points for the sake of illustration

[Puppeteer]

False, loggers, at least today, replant the trees they cut down. Don't listen to modern environmental activists, they spew propaganda because they were hijacked by anti-"Corporatist" and anti-Capitalist people who use environmentalism as a cover for their socialistic goals.

So when I see all those wonderful scars on the landscape in the Highlands of my country, which I've seen, I'll think: "That's alright, Kacen says that every tree is replanted. Even though this site is old]." I'm more inclined to think that the corporations are more likely to lie about that so that they get a bigger profit.
Your idea of taking over someone's territory and giving them an opportunity to keep only half their rightful land and then using violence when they refuse to compromise is just... flawed. I could say that I believe Americans are misusing their land, resources and being damnright selfish so we would invade and use violence when you tried to oppose us. Of course, the Americans may not be misusing their land, exploiting their resources and may be more generous than we but under your pretence I would be justified in saying you subjectively were and so could wreak havoc.

[MSpencer]

I pretty much don't give his views credence anymore. They're borderline insane, hypocritical, generally the worst bits of the right wing taken out and shaken around with the worst bits of authoritarianism under the guise of "futuristic freedom" or some such. It's actually a cover for a quite severe blend of fascism.

[Casen]

False, loggers, at least today, replant the trees they cut down. Don't listen to modern environmental activists, they spew propaganda because they were hijacked by anti-"Corporatist" and anti-Capitalist people who use environmentalism as a cover for their socialistic goals.

So when I see all those wonderful scars on the landscape in the Highlands of my country, which I've seen, I'll think: "That's alright, Kacen says that every tree is replanted. Even though this site is old]." I'm more inclined to think that the corporations are more likely to lie about that so that they get a bigger profit.

Well the only information I got was from American logging. I'm not sure how it goes over there in Britain.

I pretty much don't give his views credence anymore. They're borderline insane, hypocritical, generally the worst bits of the right wing taken out and shaken around with the worst bits of authoritarianism under the guise of "futuristic freedom" or some such. It's actually a cover for a quite severe blend of fascism.

I take that as a compliment.

[Vortigern]

You shouldn't. Your views are quite honestly racist, destructive, intolerant and, as MSpencer put it, borderline insane.

Living with nature for so long and not devising up the ideas to create technology and whatnot is a humongous waste of human potential.

This very much depends on what you believe human potential should be used for. The way humanity has gone is not necessarily the way it should have gone, or the way it was meant to go, or indeed the best way in any form. The Chinese had a wonderful, enlightened civilisation with far less modern technology than even Victorian Britain, but in every other aspect they were a far superior people.

Well I do think Nelson Mandela was a whiny communist bastard.

You're fully entitled to your view, though I feel obliged to point out numerous flaws with it.
1) Nelson Mandela was not a communist. Fact.
2) Mandela was the reason apartheid became an international issue and was eventually ended. By disagreeing with Mandela, whose main political point was an end to apartheid and racism, you are implying your own agreement with apartheid, yet you claim otherwise. Mixed signals here, Kacen.
3) Mandela was a visionary. The reason South Africa is in a good state now is almost entirely down to him. His single failing as premier was in failing to deal satisfactorily with the spread of HIV/AIDS. Everything else he did was good, thoughtful leadership.
4) As a rugby player and fan, this one may be a little biased, but Mandela is also the reason the South African rugby team was successful. He encouraged the nation to get behind them and support them in their bid to host the 1995 World Cup, which they then won. While this may not refute his being a 'whiny communist bastard', it shows a certain degree of tolerance and happiness to let the world know what South Africa was doing. There are those of you who would compare this to the 1936 Berlin Olympics, but the parallels are few and far between, exemplified by Hitler's refusal to hand Jesse Owens, a black athlete, his gold medals. Mandela presented, in person, François Pienaar with the trophy, though they were from what had, until recently, been agressively opposed ethnic groups.

However, I agree that affirmative action is an inherently racist proposal, however well meant it may be. Although it has nothing to do with the KKK or Nazis, and was meant to give black, muslim and other ethnic minorities a fair chance in a racist society. It is now unnecessary as capitalism and the desire for a greater profit and higher staff efficiency will prod the vast, vast majority of business owners into hiring the best candidate regardless of any other factor than their business potential.

[Spectre]

I think the problem with atheism, which is reactionary, is that when they think of God they think of the Abrahamic god, some butcher, unfair, hypocritical entity, or they think of some ridiculous nature gods. Atheism is reactionary to these things, primarily the former, and most atheists haven't heard of the alternative: Deism. As a former atheist, I sympathize.

How so?

Maybe you view atheism in the wrong way, I am an Atheist, I do not think of God as an Abrahamic God, I know other religions have other gods, all Atheism is is objecting to the opinion that something supernatural created the singularity, and for that fact Earth and the Universe.

Edited by General Jenkins, 15 August 2008 - 01:49 AM.

[Vortigern]

Also a good point. As an atheist one believes in the existence of no god of any form, not just abrahamic. By the way, what does that even mean? Abrahamic?

So yeah, atheism. Means the belief in no supernatural creative power, polytheistic, monotheistic, Abrahamic or whatever. No gods.

[Dauth]

Abrahamic means related to the religions descended from Abraham, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, including all variations thereof.

May I point out it is foolish to try and reason with a fascist, since they value emotions very highly and as such cannot be persuaded by logic. In fact you are more likely to get water to run uphill.

[Spectre]

Abrahamic means related to the religions descended from Abraham, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, including all variations thereof.

May I point out it is foolish to try and reason with a fascist, since they value emotions very highly and as such cannot be persuaded by logic. In fact you are more likely to get water to run uphill.

It never hurts to try, and anyways, if we can't reason with him, we'll bash him.

Edited by General Jenkins, 15 August 2008 - 04:06 PM.

[Casen]

Oh right, because someone who sympathizes with a group of people who had part of their country bombed and stolen by scum Albanians is someone who doesn't think logically.

Liberal trash get a grip on reality.

[Phil]

The Native Americans also had their country bombed and stolen, yet you claim that was perfectly fine. Even though the Albanians in Kosovo moved there in the process of a more or less natural shift of population like it happened thousands of times before in history, while the Europeans just invaded America and took the land by military force.
Yet you think the former is wrong and the latter is right? Please elaborate on your "logic" then, for I'm not able to understand it.

[Casen]

I explained already.

Also oh yeah be had fighter planes and bombers back then inorite? Too bad we didn't maybe they'd be wiped out for good so we wouldn't have the dumb Lakota problem we have now.

[Casen]

I'm sick and tired of you liberal trash making analogies without focusing on what we're speaking of. Typical liberal tactic.

I sympathize with Serbia because I would not want the same thing happening to my country. Also because giving Muslims more land = terrible idea.

[Vortigern]

giving Muslims more land = terrible idea.

No it isn't. It's no better or worse an idea than giving Christians more land. You seem to be harbouring the illusion that all Muslims are terrorists. They are not. It is only a tiny minority that believe terror is the way forward, and they are shunned by the Muslim community at large. It's only extremists in prominent positions like Abu Hamza who actually lend any credence to these people, and there aren't many of them. Muslims are not the enemy here, fanatical extremist religious people of all denominations are, if there is an enemy at all.

EDIT: Oh, and stop calling us liberal trash. You have no justification for that and as such it should be considered an unnecessary flame. Everything that has been said about you has been said with justification and reasoning which has been stated there and then. Furthermore, 'liberal' covers a wide range of people, and I very much doubt many of us have much in common, politically, other than a vague proximity to the middle ground.

Edited by Vortigern, 15 August 2008 - 05:02 PM.

[Phil]

I'm sick and tired of you liberal trash making analogies without focusing on what we're speaking of. Typical liberal tactic.

I sympathize with Serbia because I would not want the same thing happening to my country. Also because giving Muslims more land = terrible idea.

Wrong, you just refuse to face reality, which is unfortunately more complex than that little black-and-white construct of yours, built on fear and hate. Making analogies is perfectly fine as it makes sense, at least to the less narrow-minded ones among us.

[Beleg]

I'm sick and tired of you liberal trash making analogies without focusing on what we're speaking of. Typical liberal tactic.

Ah, the far right. So if I ask you questions about your statement, I'm suddenly going off topic and thus I am liberal trash. I like your reasoning.

Muslims more land = terrible idea

No, giving Radical Muslims more land = terrible idea. Giving any radical group more land is a bad idea.

[Spectre]

I'm sick and tired of you liberal trash making analogies without focusing on what we're speaking of. Typical liberal tactic.

I sympathize with Serbia because I would not want the same thing happening to my country. Also because giving Muslims more land = terrible idea.

Like others have said, you have huge faulties in your logic.

[Dauth]

I'll take liberal, I am very liberal I believe in rights, however I know that for someone to have rights they have responsibilities. Trash? Petty insults rarely carry much more than the emotion which they are known for.

A lot of this thread has been lost in people's opinions so if I may surmise a couple of points.

OP: The population of Kosovo cannot stand up for their religion and lifestyle because the Serbians have the army, the Kosovans are in the wrong.

Now for some history and facts, in a democracy they could have voted for independence if a referendum had been presented to Parliament (Much like Scotland in the UK, which would bankrupt Scotland should they leave). This didn't happen however because of the restlessness in the Albanian sector the Serbs sent in the army and slaughtered people. The EU sat on the sidelines doing nothing (Go go EU) and eventually NATO/UN went in and stopped the Serbian army, the leaders of which are now being tried for war crimes.

Back to OP: The Native Americans have no rights like the Serbians because 'I am one of the people who would be kicked out and it wouldn't be fair'.

[Phil]

Don't forget that their culture and lifestyle (or race...??) is inferior because he says so.

[Casen]

No, giving Radical Muslims more land = terrible idea. Giving any radical group more land is a bad idea.

Thanks for agreeing with me that Palestinians should not be given more land.

This would also mean you agree with taking away land from them, it's a good thing.

And the Kosovars got weapons from Al Qaeda.