Mexico drug violence spills over into the US

[DeadPoolX 9]

Logic isn't a subjective concept.

Who says it isn't? What may seem logical to one person may not seem that way to another. There is no one standard definition of logic when engaging in a debate. That suggests one side should "give in" to the other, based only on what one party believes to be logical.

[Peikko 1,575]

Logic isn't a subjective concept.

Who says it isn't? What may seem logical to one person may not seem that way to another. There is no one standard definition of logic when engaging in a debate. That suggests one side should "give in" to the other, based only on what one party believes to be logical.

No, logic is not subjective. An assessment of what is logical can be, of course.

[HAL 9000 96]

Logic isn't a subjective concept.

Who says it isn't? What may seem logical to one person may not seem that way to another. There is no one standard definition of logic when engaging in a debate. That suggests one side should "give in" to the other, based only on what one party believes to be logical.

No, logic is not subjective. An assessment of what is logical can be, of course.

Individuals vs Governments. Is that the same as Governments vs Governments?

Just curious. Is it logical to assume the are in this very well illustrated example being beat like a dead horse?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why would you claim residence where you're not from? That seems rather silly. And quite irrelevant to this discussion. You are making a claim of individual aggression when the discussion is quite clearly about national aggression. Two very completely different concepts brother DPX.

Waging individual acts of aggression agains a foreign entity is subjects to the laws of that country. Quite frequently, American embassies are forced to check up on the status of Americans that violate the laws of foreign nations... but in terms of making it a USA vs Country X issue... no. That is something else. Check your US Passport for more information about that.

If you have problems following along with the argument and think it insulting that I correct you to stay on course with the logic... then don't participate if you can't handle the logic. Easy as that.

The last paragraph is a shining example of egotistical-inducing insulting commentary. Was that really necessary? You "correct me?" You can't correct me -- these are opinions. As far as logic is concerned, we obviously have a different view on that as well. I see logic in my argument and you see it in yours. Once again, however, you toss insults my way because I don't agree with you.

Oh and don't call me "brother." I have a brother and you are not him.

Look... individuals (plural) can wage war against a nation. If that weren't true, I could go to any country in the world, do whatever I want, and it wouldn't reflect badly on the U.S. nor would it cause potential warlike situations between that country and the United States.

Yeah... if you're a terrorist...

Menial-skilled, migrant workers from rural agricultural communities don't fit that category.

You can't make that statement. Anyone could be a terrorist, including incoming illegals.

Sure I can. I just did.

Anyone *could* be anything, but as far as terrorists go its fair to say that *most* probably aren't.

Well then... I could make any statement I wish, couldn't I? How could I be wrong? After all, we can make an unsubstantiated comments we wish.

Yes, anyone could be a terrorist. But how does being illegal mean "most probably aren't"? Once again, you don't know. If you don't know, you can't claim your statement as fact (just as I can't in this situation).

*Sigh* "Waging war" requires one country to take some sort of military or paramilitary action towards another.

The only way individuals can wage war (at least according to currently accepted criteria) is via terrorism.

Obviously I can't *know* who is and isn't a terrorist, but I can certainly make an educated guess.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Why would you claim residence where you're not from? That seems rather silly. And quite irrelevant to this discussion. You are making a claim of individual aggression when the discussion is quite clearly about national aggression. Two very completely different concepts brother DPX.

Waging individual acts of aggression agains a foreign entity is subjects to the laws of that country. Quite frequently, American embassies are forced to check up on the status of Americans that violate the laws of foreign nations... but in terms of making it a USA vs Country X issue... no. That is something else. Check your US Passport for more information about that.

If you have problems following along with the argument and think it insulting that I correct you to stay on course with the logic... then don't participate if you can't handle the logic. Easy as that.

The last paragraph is a shining example of egotistical-inducing insulting commentary. Was that really necessary? You "correct me?" You can't correct me -- these are opinions. As far as logic is concerned, we obviously have a different view on that as well. I see logic in my argument and you see it in yours. Once again, however, you toss insults my way because I don't agree with you.

Oh and don't call me "brother." I have a brother and you are not him.

Brother DPX...

Get over it. Or look for some lavender or something to calm down.

Logic is what it is. You are making ludicrous and irrelevant claims that are quite well documented in international law. Don't believe me? Read your passport pages carefully.

As an individual, you are subject to the laws of foreign nations while in those nations. As are illegals that come here illegally and are caught.

Again... when you can prove that its the Government of the Estados Unidos de México waging an act of aggression, then you'll start making more sense. Otherwise... calm the heck down. Seriously.

Your condescending remarks have gone far beyond barely amusing into the dangerous realm of annoying me. If you cannot debate in such a manner that does not include being antagonistic and insulting, then you are no longer debating. You are attacking a person's character and not the topic at hand.

As I specified above, do not call me brother. I have one that I am quite proud of and as I said, you are not him.

My claims are neither ludicrous nor are they irrelevant -- no more or less than yours. I'd also like you to prove that Mexicans coming in is not an aggressive act.

[HAL 9000 96]

Why would you claim residence where you're not from? That seems rather silly. And quite irrelevant to this discussion. You are making a claim of individual aggression when the discussion is quite clearly about national aggression. Two very completely different concepts brother DPX.

Waging individual acts of aggression agains a foreign entity is subjects to the laws of that country. Quite frequently, American embassies are forced to check up on the status of Americans that violate the laws of foreign nations... but in terms of making it a USA vs Country X issue... no. That is something else. Check your US Passport for more information about that.

If you have problems following along with the argument and think it insulting that I correct you to stay on course with the logic... then don't participate if you can't handle the logic. Easy as that.

The last paragraph is a shining example of egotistical-inducing insulting commentary. Was that really necessary? You "correct me?" You can't correct me -- these are opinions. As far as logic is concerned, we obviously have a different view on that as well. I see logic in my argument and you see it in yours. Once again, however, you toss insults my way because I don't agree with you.

Oh and don't call me "brother." I have a brother and you are not him.

Brother DPX...

Get over it. Or look for some lavender or something to calm down.

Logic is what it is. You are making ludicrous and irrelevant claims that are quite well documented in international law. Don't believe me? Read your passport pages carefully.

As an individual, you are subject to the laws of foreign nations while in those nations. As are illegals that come here illegally and are caught.

Again... when you can prove that its the Government of the Estados Unidos de México waging an act of aggression, then you'll start making more sense. Otherwise... calm the heck down. Seriously.

Your condescending remarks have gone far beyond barely amusing into the dangerous realm of annoying me. If you cannot debate in such a manner that does not include being antagonistic and insulting, then you are no longer debating. You are attacking a person's character and not the topic at hand.

As I specified above, do not call me brother. I have one that I am quite proud of and as I said, you are not him.

My claims are neither ludicrous nor are they irrelevant -- no more or less than yours. I'd also like you to prove that Mexicans coming in is not an aggressive act.

Then report me and let the mods decide what is logical and get over it. I don't need to get melodramatic and frankly neither should you.

Can you prove that I am stating that individual Mexicans entering the US illegally are not making individual aggressive acts? Nope. In fact, I repeatedly state that individuals breaking the laws of nations they are in are subject to that nations laws. Go ahead and read back. Yet you very clearly claimed illogically that that is an act of aggression being waged by Mexico. Read back to your original post and see if you catch yourself.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

ladies ladies,

Calm downnnnn

[Peikko 1,575]

Why would you claim residence where you're not from? That seems rather silly. And quite irrelevant to this discussion. You are making a claim of individual aggression when the discussion is quite clearly about national aggression. Two very completely different concepts brother DPX.

Waging individual acts of aggression agains a foreign entity is subjects to the laws of that country. Quite frequently, American embassies are forced to check up on the status of Americans that violate the laws of foreign nations... but in terms of making it a USA vs Country X issue... no. That is something else. Check your US Passport for more information about that.

If you have problems following along with the argument and think it insulting that I correct you to stay on course with the logic... then don't participate if you can't handle the logic. Easy as that.

The last paragraph is a shining example of egotistical-inducing insulting commentary. Was that really necessary? You "correct me?" You can't correct me -- these are opinions. As far as logic is concerned, we obviously have a different view on that as well. I see logic in my argument and you see it in yours. Once again, however, you toss insults my way because I don't agree with you.

Oh and don't call me "brother." I have a brother and you are not him.

Brother DPX...

Get over it. Or look for some lavender or something to calm down.

Logic is what it is. You are making ludicrous and irrelevant claims that are quite well documented in international law. Don't believe me? Read your passport pages carefully.

As an individual, you are subject to the laws of foreign nations while in those nations. As are illegals that come here illegally and are caught.

Again... when you can prove that its the Government of the Estados Unidos de México waging an act of aggression, then you'll start making more sense. Otherwise... calm the heck down. Seriously.

Your condescending remarks have gone far beyond barely amusing into the dangerous realm of annoying me. If you cannot debate in such a manner that does not include being antagonistic and insulting, then you are no longer debating. You are attacking a person's character and not the topic at hand.

As I specified above, do not call me brother. I have one that I am quite proud of and as I said, you are not him.

My claims are neither ludicrous nor are they irrelevant -- no more or less than yours. I'd also like you to prove that Mexicans coming in is not an aggressive act.

Then report me and let the mods decide what is logical and get over it. I don't need to get melodramatic and frankly neither should you.

Can you prove that I am stating that individual Mexicans entering the US illegally are not making individual aggressive acts? Nope. In fact, I repeatedly state that individuals breaking the laws of nations they are in are subject to that nations laws. Go ahead and read back. Yet you very clearly claimed illogically that that is an act of aggression being waged by Mexico. Read back to your original post and see if you catch yourself.

Mods do not decide what is and isn't logical Hal.

[HAL 9000 96]

Why would you claim residence where you're not from? That seems rather silly. And quite irrelevant to this discussion. You are making a claim of individual aggression when the discussion is quite clearly about national aggression. Two very completely different concepts brother DPX.

Waging individual acts of aggression agains a foreign entity is subjects to the laws of that country. Quite frequently, American embassies are forced to check up on the status of Americans that violate the laws of foreign nations... but in terms of making it a USA vs Country X issue... no. That is something else. Check your US Passport for more information about that.

If you have problems following along with the argument and think it insulting that I correct you to stay on course with the logic... then don't participate if you can't handle the logic. Easy as that.

The last paragraph is a shining example of egotistical-inducing insulting commentary. Was that really necessary? You "correct me?" You can't correct me -- these are opinions. As far as logic is concerned, we obviously have a different view on that as well. I see logic in my argument and you see it in yours. Once again, however, you toss insults my way because I don't agree with you.

Oh and don't call me "brother." I have a brother and you are not him.

Brother DPX...

Get over it. Or look for some lavender or something to calm down.

Logic is what it is. You are making ludicrous and irrelevant claims that are quite well documented in international law. Don't believe me? Read your passport pages carefully.

As an individual, you are subject to the laws of foreign nations while in those nations. As are illegals that come here illegally and are caught.

Again... when you can prove that its the Government of the Estados Unidos de México waging an act of aggression, then you'll start making more sense. Otherwise... calm the heck down. Seriously.

Your condescending remarks have gone far beyond barely amusing into the dangerous realm of annoying me. If you cannot debate in such a manner that does not include being antagonistic and insulting, then you are no longer debating. You are attacking a person's character and not the topic at hand.

As I specified above, do not call me brother. I have one that I am quite proud of and as I said, you are not him.

My claims are neither ludicrous nor are they irrelevant -- no more or less than yours. I'd also like you to prove that Mexicans coming in is not an aggressive act.

Then report me and let the mods decide what is logical and get over it. I don't need to get melodramatic and frankly neither should you.

Can you prove that I am stating that individual Mexicans entering the US illegally are not making individual aggressive acts? Nope. In fact, I repeatedly state that individuals breaking the laws of nations they are in are subject to that nations laws. Go ahead and read back. Yet you very clearly claimed illogically that that is an act of aggression being waged by Mexico. Read back to your original post and see if you catch yourself.

Mods do not decide what is and isn't logical Hal.

It was a little word play MC

Post #67 in this thread, however, is not. Last sentences is quite clearly a claim that is quite illogical and incongruous with simple international conventions of individuals in foreign nations.

[panamania79 2]

according to all VJ.. they do.. and all mexicans are drugdealers, know how to set a crack lab with 2 cans a hose and a lighter.. and are ruthless killers.. SAMBO has nothing against Mexican killa' style

If I knew it was that easy to make a crack lab, I would have done it a long time ago.

Exctasy is easier

That's a modern drug that is way after my time.

Mine too

[Heracles 417]

If you have problems following along with the argument and think it insulting that I correct you to stay on course with the logic... then don't participate if you can't handle the logic. Easy as that.

Anyone who disagree with one of you clowns is illogical.. Man you are a loser.

[Heracles 417]

Your condescending remarks have gone far beyond barely amusing into the dangerous realm of annoying me. If you cannot debate in such a manner that does not include being antagonistic and insulting, then you are no longer debating. You are attacking a person's character and not the topic at hand.

As I specified above, do not call me brother. I have one that I am quite proud of and as I said, you are not him.

My claims are neither ludicrous nor are they irrelevant -- no more or less than yours. I'd also like you to prove that Mexicans coming in is not an aggressive act.

He is from Shittyargo or is it Corruptago so forgive him. Ghetto terms are also quite there.

Interesting to see yesterdays prediction played out once again:

Here is a prediction of a thread.

1. OP
2. (insert name) Gives their opinion.
3. The usual group, without fail, starts rebutting poster. if it's one of the disliked members, a confrontation is a given. In other words, anyone with opposing non-liberal views.
4. Consequently, thread turns into a (insert name) is required to defend themselves and their views.
5. (insert name) is then labeled, insulted, harassed, ridiculed. . A>Z of insults
6. (insert name) gives up posting because it is pointless.
7. Group then lives to fight another day. Without ever adding anything to the thread.

Even when I am not on VJ but pop in, without posting, to see what's in the news. You guys are doing the above to some other member. Deny it all you like.

Lets look at who is attacking:

• Paul Daniels
• A.J.
• TävôLuDô
• HAL 9000
• Madame Cleo

The usual bunch who just so happen to gang up on and attack most people they disagree with. Pretty much every thread I am antagonized in involves one or more of these members. So that is either a 'coincidence', or my favorite "generalizing", or basically how the OT section of VJ rolls. Of course, naturally, their mod buddies turn a blind eye. God forbid anyone do the same to one of them. VJ suspensions fly in no time when that happens.

Edited February 11, 2009 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Self-delusion is not "prediction".

You're not omniscient Boo-Yah, neither are you particularly perceptive.

You see what you want to see, hence we have these silly rants about how victimised you are on a personal level.

[HAL 9000 96]

Self-delusion is not "prediction".

You're not omniscient Boo-Yah, neither are you particularly perceptive.

You see what you want to see, hence we have these silly rants about how victimised you are on a personal level.

Either way, he's just a douche that seriously doesn't warrant the time of day most of us give him.

[Heracles 417]

Self-delusion is not "prediction".

You're not omniscient Boo-Yah, neither are you particularly perceptive.

You see what you want to see, hence we have these silly rants about how victimised you are on a personal level.

What would you call the following post you moron? Or is that too "Self-delusion"? Your bullcrap has been caught out by pretty much everyone who has tried to discuss anything with out.

Your condescending remarks have gone far beyond barely amusing into the dangerous realm of annoying me. If you cannot debate in such a manner that does not include being antagonistic and insulting, then you are no longer debating. You are attacking a person's character and not the topic at hand.

As I specified above, do not call me brother. I have one that I am quite proud of and as I said, you are not him.

My claims are neither ludicrous nor are they irrelevant -- no more or less than yours. I'd also like you to prove that Mexicans coming in is not an aggressive act.

Edited February 11, 2009 by Aficionado