Islam: a Plan for World Domination?

[Heracles 417]

Fair enough. How's about I clarify your statement on 'improving this nation' and 'building it up':

Corporal punishment being meted out in the town square.

Tossing out the national constitution when its stipulates are 'inconvenient'

Its ok to order our military to destroy entire cities as retaliatory acts, in order to prevent terrorism.

"The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it." - Adolf Hitler

Sure. It's Hitler. But I think he's right on the money with that one...

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Boo-Yah, this is a stretch, I know, but you could try having a conversation with the people that are here rather than the people who are posting somewhere else. #6 isn't responsible for the entire left wing any more than you're responsible for David Duke.

Many people have insinuated it in VJ as well. I am just not going to waste time retrieving those posts. Some of The_dip_sticks posts in this thread alone are a start though..

Same goes with other posts from Number_6 and co who linked oppression to crime. Yet, as usual, provided no progressive solution to the problem.

Its good that you pride yourself on having ideas - but when you start talking about 'destroying entire cities' and beating people in the street - I think thats an instance where having no ideas is better than having a really, really bad one

And you continue to take these points so far out of context that the original meaning is totally lost - in an 'Orwellian ministry of truth' kind of way.

For instance - you have suggested that I have said and/or implied that I believe a person's poor socioeconomic conditions justifies their committing of violent crimes. I have never said this, I have never implied it. I have even explicitly stated numerous times that I do not believe that there is any 'excuse' to committing crime.

That said - you continue to equate statements linking poverty to crime (which is all they were) with letting off murderers because they are poor and desperate. Similarly the posts here were about people's value judgments related to their perceptions of war, and not about 'what the US is doing wrong in Iraq'. You added that little piece of contextual trickery all by yourself.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Number 6

[Heracles 417]

From my experience in the US, improvement for the left refers to whether something is constitutional or whether lesbian poodles should have the right to marry. Nothing really about improving America as a nation.

The last major infrastructure project undertaken to improve the US was during the Eisenhower era, which was the interstates.

1- lesbian poodles are people too

2- well heres the thing...the constitution is one thing that, in my opinion, we should remain conservative on

3- republican does not mean conservative and democrat does not mean progressive, even though we often like to think so

4- we are too busy fighting wars to worry about infrastructure...maybe thats something we can actually agree on

Point 3 and 4 I agree with.

2 not so much. The original context of the constitution has been grossly taken out of context. It is actually what holds this country back now.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

How is destroying an entire city as a deterrent to terrorism a 'workable' solution?

[Heracles 417]

Its good that you pride yourself on having ideas - but when you start talking about 'destroying entire cities' and beating people in the street - I think thats an instance where having no ideas is better than having a really, really bad one

And you continue to take these points so far out of context that the original meaning is totally lost - in an 'Orwellian ministry of truth' kind of way.

For instance - you have suggested that I have said and/or implied that I believe a person's poor socioeconomic conditions justifies their committing of violent crimes. I have never said this, I have never implied it. I have even explicitly stated numerous times that I do not believe that there is any 'excuse' to committing crime.

That said - you continue to equate statements linking poverty to crime (which is all they were) with letting off murderers because they are poor and desperate. Similarly the posts here were about people's value judgments related to their perceptions of war, and not about 'what the US is doing wrong in Iraq'. You added that little piece of contextual trickery all by yourself.

Bravo. A post with a few sentences..

I definitely know of one person I would beat up if we ever crossed paths..

You also failed to provide any workable ideas to reducing the crime amongst that community. All you did was state the obvious and then played the race card..

Edited September 14, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

BTW - you may want to rework your grammar there. The way I read that you seem to see saying that my last 500+ posts are proof of me providing workable solutions. I'm sure that's not what you mean't now is it...?

[Heracles 417]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

BTW - you may want to rework your grammar there. The way I read that you seem to see saying that my last 500+ posts are proof of me providing workable solutions. I'm sure that's not what you mean't now is it...?

Touché.. You got me number_6

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Bravo. A post with a few sentences..

Yes. I tend to write more than one sentence when I post.

I definitely know of one person I would beat up if we ever crossed paths..

Threats (however vague) really demean your arguments, and highlight your lack of wit.

You also failed to provide any workable ideas to reducing the crime amongst that community. All you did was state the obvious and then played the race card..

I wonder if my lack of being able to provide a solution to 'reducing' crime and poverty is because I see those issues are rather more complex than you do (certainly when you consider the other statement - that destroying cities is a viable plan - that's either the product of gross ignorance or crushing stupidity). And yet - no government has been able to entirely stamp out poverty (yes...even in Australia) so what profound solution should I be suggesting to fix a problem that no government has been able to conclusively solve...

[Heracles 417]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

How is destroying an entire city as a deterrent to terrorism a 'workable' solution?

Maybe you, Caladan and PH can go to Iraq and try to negotiate with the insurgents. I'll pay for your tickets..

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

How is destroying an entire city as a deterrent to terrorism a 'workable' solution?

Maybe you, Caladan and PH can go to Iraq and try to negotiate with the insurgents. I'll pay for your tickets..

Thanks for that offer - but I'd really rather you tell me how it is a 'workable' solution, and how committing worse terrorist acts should somehow reverse the phenomenon of Islamic extremism.

[Heracles 417]

I wonder if my lack of being able to provide a solution to 'reducing' crime and poverty is because I see those issues are rather more complex than you do (certainly when you consider the other statement - that destroying cities is a viable plan - that's either the product of gross ignorance or crushing stupidity). And yet - no government has been able to entirely stamp out poverty (yes...even in Australia) so what profound solution should I be suggesting to fix a problem that no government has been able to conclusively solve...

sure thing..

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I wonder if my lack of being able to provide a solution to 'reducing' crime and poverty is because I see those issues are rather more complex than you do (certainly when you consider the other statement - that destroying cities is a viable plan - that's either the product of gross ignorance or crushing stupidity). And yet - no government has been able to entirely stamp out poverty (yes...even in Australia) so what profound solution should I be suggesting to fix a problem that no government has been able to conclusively solve...

sure thing..

BTW - what was your 'definitive' solution to that particular problem? Did you yourself have one?

[Heracles 417]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

How is destroying an entire city as a deterrent to terrorism a 'workable' solution?

Maybe you, Caladan and PH can go to Iraq and try to negotiate with the insurgents. I'll pay for your tickets..

Thanks for that offer - but I'd really rather you tell me how it is a 'workable' solution, and how committing worse terrorist acts should somehow reverse the phenomenon of Islamic extremism.

no no no. You're the one who criticizes any solution. Therefore I am waiting for you to enlighten me on what the UK, US and Australia should to to end the conflict in Iraq?? As well as what we should do to eliminate the threat of Al Qaeda?? I am dumb your are smart. So pass on the wisdom..

Edited September 14, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Heracles 417]

I wonder if my lack of being able to provide a solution to 'reducing' crime and poverty is because I see those issues are rather more complex than you do (certainly when you consider the other statement - that destroying cities is a viable plan - that's either the product of gross ignorance or crushing stupidity). And yet - no government has been able to entirely stamp out poverty (yes...even in Australia) so what profound solution should I be suggesting to fix a problem that no government has been able to conclusively solve...

sure thing..

BTW - what was your 'definitive' solution to that particular problem? Did you yourself have one?

Nice generalization. Seems to be a different story when you say it as you do apply wit to your responses and make sure, much like a politician, there is never a definitive answer.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The day you start providing some workable solutions of your own is the day i start listening to your rhetoric. Your last 500+ posts are proof of that.

How is destroying an entire city as a deterrent to terrorism a 'workable' solution?

Maybe you, Caladan and PH can go to Iraq and try to negotiate with the insurgents. I'll pay for your tickets..

Thanks for that offer - but I'd really rather you tell me how it is a 'workable' solution, and how committing worse terrorist acts should somehow reverse the phenomenon of Islamic extremism.

no no no. You're the one who criticizes any solution. Therefore I am waiting for you to enlighten me on what the UK, US and Australia should to to end the conflict in Iraq?? As well as what we should do to eliminate the threat of Al Qaeda??

Actually if you want to get technical - I criticised 'your' solution, not 'every' solution

As far as Iraq goes - I have said numerous times that I see the available options right now as rather limited. That we have arrived at this point because of a fundamentally flawed policy is one thing - and in fact its one of the reason why I was opposed to this thing from the start - I don't think that is any secret. That said - I don't believe the US can pull out of Iraq until some semblance of stability is achieved. That said, 'stability' isn't reliant purely on military involvement, rather it acts as a bandaid on an open wound. Believe it or not I actually agree more or less with the General and the President that a sudden withdrawal is out of the question - but I do think that the key to ending the war relies on developments off of the battlefield.

As to what I think we should do to end the threat of Al Qaeda - well that's rather more complicated. Yet I don't think its unreasonable to suggest that dealing with a diffuse, international terrorist organisation with roots and influence in many countries requires a primarily political solution to reduce their influence, rather than blowing up entire cities and provoking a violent outcry.

If you really think Hiroshima-ing a city will reduce the influence of Al-Qaeda, and prevent acts terrorism being perpetrated - you're welcome to your opinion. Still... I remember the last time I threw a rock at a wasp's nest...

Edited September 14, 2007 by Number 6