Author Topic: A View from the Eye of the Storm (Read 14244 times)

Pongo · « **Reply #150 on:** June 23, 2004, 02:05:20 PM »

I dont have to clarrify any further in what way I aggree with him and in what ways I think hes being dishonest. You want to cheer the whole thing cause there are some great points and observations in there. You accused me of skimming it. I have been called a dolt by some here who obviosly dont understand the situation at all and dont want to.

my above explanation is tiresome to me cause it should be self evident to a man as smart as yourself that the author is being dishonest. It apperently is not self evident to you. So lets drop it You cheer him on and Ill be disapointed in his dishonesty.
Nuke will never know the difference.

Toad · « **Reply #151 on:** June 23, 2004, 02:22:40 PM »

Thank you, Mr. Pongo. You have typified the liberal attitude towards discussion, IMO.

"No further questions, your honor."

Nash · « **Reply #152 on:** June 23, 2004, 02:30:04 PM »

More like "No further answers, your honor. It's obvious you're never going to get it."

That's just my take, but hey.

Pongo · « **Reply #153 on:** June 23, 2004, 03:30:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Thank you, Mr. Pongo. You have typified the liberal attitude towards discussion, IMO.

"No further questions, your honor."

Does that make you feel better? Why dont you just type..
U r 0wn3d!
deeeethhh to booooshhh

Its a bbs not a de programming service. All I can do is tell you the truth no matter how convoluted and desperate your efforts to cling to your programing.
How the credible have fallen.

Toad · « **Reply #154 on:** June 23, 2004, 03:34:45 PM »

Nah, it's more like "I'm not going to discuss anything unless it's on my terms. I'm not interested in a free exchange of ideas."

Pongo · « **Reply #155 on:** June 23, 2004, 03:49:06 PM »

That is not the case at all. You contribute no ideas. I told you from the begining that this gentleman was being dishonest yet you said I thought that was because I was biased. You present what you aggree with I present what I disagree with. You never once. Even once even try to address my major issue with the guy. You just keep babbleing in circles staying close to the post your tied too.

Your not freely exchaning ideas. If the gentleman was here to defend his own ideas it might be interesting. But discussing it with a closed minded automon thats has to live by "ctrl c" "ctrl p" is just boring.

Toad · « **Reply #156 on:** June 23, 2004, 06:23:59 PM »

What, afraid to show your opinion on his proposed "course of action"?

To daring?

Pongo · « **Reply #157 on:** June 23, 2004, 06:28:22 PM »

Ya too daring for me.

Nash · « **Reply #158 on:** June 23, 2004, 06:34:54 PM »

Toad, in the post you made (and asked for my opinion) that had the "agree" "disagree" stuff, I agreed and disagreed with all the things you agreed and disagreed with.

But it seemed obvious to me. For eg.:

"But before you fight and win, by force or otherwise, you have to realize that you are in a war"

or

"Above all, never surrender to terror."

Sure, fine...

It seems to me your questions would produce more interesting answers if you began to explore who we are at war with and why. THEN apply those things and see if they're getting done the way your author proposes.

Nash · « **Reply #159 on:** June 23, 2004, 06:35:53 PM »

oops. double.

Toad · « **Reply #160 on:** June 23, 2004, 07:11:08 PM »

Nash you and I then agree on the speaker's proposed "course of action"?

But you don't agree with his reasoning/theories that get him to that point?

Toad · « **Reply #161 on:** June 23, 2004, 07:11:09 PM »

Nash you and I then agree on the speaker's proposed "course of action"?

But you don't agree with his reasoning/theories that get him to that point?

Nash · « **Reply #162 on:** June 23, 2004, 07:17:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Nash you and I then agree on the speaker's proposed "course of action"?

But you don't agree with his reasoning/theories that get him to that point?

Some think Iraq should have been invaded due to WMD. Others think it was human rights violations. Both agree on the war.

Do you find that unusual?

Toad · « **Reply #163 on:** June 23, 2004, 08:49:27 PM »

Not finding anything.

Looking for a place to actually start this discussion.

Nash · « **Reply #164 on:** June 23, 2004, 08:54:04 PM »

Hehe.

Hows about what I asked above?:

"It seems to me your questions would produce more interesting answers if you began to explore who we are at war with and why. [edit - and who we aren't at war with and why not, and]THEN apply those things and see if they're getting done the way your author proposes."

Maybe that's a dead end too... I dunno. Anything there?