OT: Saddam Hussein Arrested

rextorres · #1 December 15th, 2003, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:
Originally posted by rextorres:
[QB] I think that's unfair. I've staked out a position and you merely disagree with it. When you disagree with my position it's discussion when I refute your position it's argumentative. [qb]

Actually... when you refute someones position in an overtly hostile manner, it is arumentative. If you drop the hostility, it will become discussion like most other people's responses.

Quote:

Fyron even called me "partisan" because he disagrees with all my postitions but of course he not a partisan

It miust be nice knowing what everyone else thinks and believes. I have not actually posted anything that would support such a statement. What I have posted that I disagree with is your attitude and manner of "discussion".

And for the record, Bush did lie. It is called propaganda, part of waging war. Every war fought throughout history has been filled with propaganda. Propaganda is by its very nature at best a half-truth. You can not fault someone for employing propaganda. You can certainly fault them for their real reasons for going to war, but not just the fact that they lied. Lying is what being a leader is about.

You're right Fyron I don't know what you think or believe all I know is what you write in this forum. My assumption is that you are being intellectually honest and what you write reflects what you think.

I have reread all my postings in this thread and there is not one hostile word leveled at anyone (on this forum). I think you may percieve them to be hostile because they are the opposite of your positions (that's what I think anyway). On the other hand I took the partisan comment to be hostility aimed at me.

So with that said I challenge you to find a position that I have staked where you DO agree with me. If we disagree on every political position written in this forum and I am a "partisan" then doesn't that make you a "partisan" too?

[ December 15, 2003, 00:13: Message edited by: rextorres ]

geoschmo · #2 December 15th, 2003, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
And for the record, Bush did lie. It is called propaganda, part of waging war. Every war fought throughout history has been filled with propaganda. Propaganda is by its very nature at best a half-truth. You can not fault someone for employing propaganda. You can certainly fault them for their real reasons for going to war, but not just the fact that they lied. Lying is what being a leader is about.

Uh, I don't know about this Fyron. Personally I am not convinced that Bush lied about Iraq's WMD's. It very possible, if not likely, at this point Bush was very wrong about the threat of Iraqi WMD's. But being wrong and lying are two very different things.

If someone were to prove that Bush knew that Iraq had no legitimate WMD threat and that the war was only intended to line the pockets of Haliburton then I would say that goes way beyond propaganda. Propaganda is lying to gain tactical advantage over the enemy. This would be lying to your own people to cover up presidential malfeseance of a tremendous scale.

Geoschmo

President_Elect_Shang · #3 December 15th, 2003, 02:15 AM

I don�t think that Bush lied; I think that Blair and he felt the threat was there. Saddam had enough time to conceal or destroy most evidence before the ground war kicked off. With him in custody it may lead to the uncovering of stashes that are still hidden. Only time will pan this one out.

Fyron · #4 December 15th, 2003, 02:15 AM

Rex, I did not say your hostility is aimed at anyone in particular. The overall tone of your Messages is extremely dismissive of anyone that does not share your opinions. You can be hostile in general without a specific target in mind. I could rattle off a list of other adjectives that might be more appropriate than "hostile", but that would accomplish little. This is much more evident in the Military Buffs thread (as well as the tone of many of your Posts in these sorts of threads that have existed in the past) than in this thread, but the issue is being discussed here, not there.

As for your challenge, I do not have an opinion one way or another on many of these particular issues, so meeting it (as well as failing it) would be rather difficult.

rextorres · #5 December 15th, 2003, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Rex, I did not say your hostility is aimed at anyone in particular. The overall tone of your Messages is extremely dismissive of anyone that does not share your opinions. You can be hostile in general without a specific target in mind. I could rattle off a list of other adjectives that might be more appropriate than "hostile", but that would accomplish little. This is much more evident in the Military Buffs thread (as well as the tone of many of your Posts in these sorts of threads that have existed in the past) than in this thread, but the issue is being discussed here, not there.

As for your challenge, I do not have an opinion one way or another on many of these particular issues, so meeting it (as well as failing it) would be rather difficult.

I suppose calling someone a "flag waver" could be considered an insult in some circles, but other than that I do not read any hostility in my tone in that thread either.

I did disagree with you in that thread as well though . . . so maybe that's why you are picking up hostility.

BTW: Can I quote what you've posted here next time you write an opinion.

CNCRaymond · #6 December 15th, 2003, 03:31 AM

Quote:

I suppose calling someone a "flag waver" could be considered an insult in some circles, but other than that I do not read any hostility in my tone in that thread either.

I think the person you called "flag waver" was thrilled to death by it.

Seriously though, it was a bit provacative. I am surprised he let it go without challenging you. If he is a flag waver, then you would have to provide proof, IE a picture of such, and since you cannot provide such proof, the alligation can be taken as I said, provocatively. In stead he simply let the comment go without comment. That says a lot about his character.

But all is good that ends good, so lets move on.

CNCRaymond · #7 December 15th, 2003, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by geoschmo:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
And for the record, Bush did lie. It is called propaganda, part of waging war. Every war fought throughout history has been filled with propaganda. Propaganda is by its very nature at best a half-truth. You can not fault someone for employing propaganda. You can certainly fault them for their real reasons for going to war, but not just the fact that they lied. Lying is what being a leader is about.

Uh, I don't know about this Fyron. Personally I am not convinced that Bush lied about Iraq's WMD's. It very possible, if not likely, at this point Bush was very wrong about the threat of Iraqi WMD's. But being wrong and lying are two very different things.

If someone were to prove that Bush knew that Iraq had no legitimate WMD threat and that the war was only intended to line the pockets of Haliburton then I would say that goes way beyond propaganda. Propaganda is lying to gain tactical advantage over the enemy. This would be lying to your own people to cover up presidential malfeseance of a tremendous scale.

Geoschmo

Well spoken Geoschmo. Although Fyron does make a good point and one that can pass as he has described it. Bush may have been spreading propoganda knowing that it might not be accurate. That is something that he will have to answer for in time I think.

About this "Haliburton" can you provide more info. I only briefly heard about this the other day and have not been able to do a follow up. Thanks.