Author Topic: Senate majority leader: Iraq war is LOST (Read 4041 times)

Elfie · « **Reply #60 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:18:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
i don't buy this "i have to kill my neighbor because he is different". [/B]

While we as Americans find that whole mindset hard to comprehend, folks in other parts of the world seem to be able to embrace it wholeheartedly with no problem at all. Sad really.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #61 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:25:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
how many different ethnic and religious groups live in the USA?

if they can live together in the USA, they can live together in Iraq, or africa or bosina or wherever.

i don't buy this "i have to kill my neighbor because he is different".

Wounded Knee, KKK lynchings, Medgar Evars, slavery, we have our history.... the kill your neighbor mentality is not all that far removed if it has been removed at all.

Viking · « **Reply #62 on:** April 20, 2007, 11:48:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Boy to hear you say it. One would think we got our butts kicked in Nam.
Nice spin
You sure you dont work for CNN?

First of all you didn’t hear me say “it”, you read what I wrote. Any perceived “tone” in my previous post is purely a figment of your imagination and personal bias. Secondly, you did lose the Vietnam War. How and why you lost the war is a discussion better suited for a separate thread.

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
How about you prove there were no terrosit ties? You are the one who said it. How can I give a counterpoint to something which you've simply spewed form your mouth with no data/support whatsoever?

Son, you can't simply fling poo. Go ahead, try it, dig a little. Put something up to prove there were no terrorist ties in Iraq.

Proving a negative is impossible … like proving there were no WMD in Iraq. I believe you possess the intellect to understand this basic truth, so I can only assume it is an attempt at making a straw-man argument. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #63 on:** April 20, 2007, 12:02:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking

Proving a negative is impossible … like proving there were no WMD in Iraq. I believe you possess the intellect to understand this basic truth, so I can only assume it is an attempt at making a straw-man argument. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

There are no intelligent people in Scandanavia. I don't have to prove it because it's a negative.

Viking · « **Reply #64 on:** April 20, 2007, 12:04:56 PM »

Not only do you not have to prove that statement, you can’t possibly prove it. Such a statement is however easily refutable.

straffo · « **Reply #65 on:** April 20, 2007, 12:31:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
There are no intelligent people in Scandanavia. I don't have to prove it because it's a negative.

You're not intelligent.

no need for a proof ,he ?

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #66 on:** April 20, 2007, 12:37:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
Montagnards.

Thank you very much, sir. My foreign language spelling is somewhat lacking.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #67 on:** April 20, 2007, 12:38:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
You're not intelligent.

no need for a proof ,he ?

Exactly.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #68 on:** April 20, 2007, 12:39:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
Not only do you not have to prove that statement, you can’t possibly prove it. Such a statement is however easily refutable.

I don't have to prove it, It must be true because I can't, and therefore don't have to, support it with evidence. This is per your logic.

rpm · « **Reply #69 on:** April 20, 2007, 01:00:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
that is why the terriorsts blow up women and children, so people like you and Reid can say "the war is lost". You and Reid and the media are supporting the al qaeda propaganda machine.

OR, it could be they are blowing people up because they are religious fanatics. Putting the Bush propaganda machine in high gear will not change the body count.

Hazzer · « **Reply #70 on:** April 20, 2007, 01:18:32 PM »

It's a lose lose situation in Iraq and Afghanistan,their will be no winners only losers,the biggest losers will be the Iraqi & Afghan peoples,aqnd Bush will go down as the worst president the USA has ever had,Blair will be remebered only for his ill thought through and mendacious Jolly in Iraq.If only these two had boned up on the history of this region & the British empires attempts at restructering the map to suit it's interests ....History will not be Kind to either....The Ramifications here will be more far reaching and more serious than vietnam due to the strategic importance of the Region.

Yeager · « **Reply #71 on:** April 20, 2007, 02:04:20 PM »

The spice must flow! Bring in the Guild Navigator!!!!!

Viking · « **Reply #72 on:** April 20, 2007, 02:13:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
I don't have to prove it, It must be true because I can't, and therefore don't have to, support it with evidence. This is per your logic.

Another straw-man argument. I never said it must be true just because it couldn’t be proven. That’s your faulty logic. I was just pointing out the stupidity of asking someone to prove a negative, like you did.

Prove that you’re not a rapist Mr. Bailey. You can’t … but that doesn’t make it true … nor does it make it false. So asking you to prove you’re not a rapist is in itself a misleading fallacy since you can’t prove a negative. It is however a tactic often used by dumb people who doesn’t know better, or by smart people against dumb people who doesn’t know better. Though, I do think I’ve sufficiently proven that it doesn’t work on intelligent Scandinavians.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #73 on:** April 20, 2007, 02:24:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Viking
Another straw-man argument. I never said it must be true just because it couldn’t be proven. That’s your faulty logic. I was just pointing out the stupidity of asking someone to prove a negative, like you did.

Prove that you’re not a rapist Mr. Bailey. You can’t … but that doesn’t make it true … nor does it make it false. So asking you to prove you’re not a rapist is in itself a misleading fallacy since you can’t prove a negative. It is however a tactic often used by dumb people who doesn’t know better, or by smart people against dumb people who doesn’t know better. Though, I do think I’ve sufficiently proven that it doesn’t work on intelligent Scandinavians.

It was your straw man argument and now you are trying to twist your initial implication because your own flawed logic was used against you. You can blabber on all you like but the fact is that you implied that Frode didn't have to prove there were no terrorist ties in Iraq because proving a negative is impossible. Take it! Game, Set, Match and I'm done with you.

You are dismissed.

Viking · « **Reply #74 on:** April 20, 2007, 02:36:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
It was your straw man argument and now you are trying to twist your initial implication because your own flawed logic was used against you. You can blabber on all you like but the fact is that you implied that Frode didn't have to prove there were no terrorist ties in Iraq because proving a negative is impossible. Take it! Game, Set, Match and I'm done with you.

You are dismissed.

He doesn’t have to prove anything. No one has to prove anything. However his argument is impossible to prove and thus asking him to prove it is stupid. I am however beginning to think Straffo is correct in his statement on your intelligence. You seem to be proving it with every post you make.

And your “take it!” etc. juvenile banter does not work on me either. You cannot anger me; I find your posts far to entertaining for that.