You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Seymour Hersh: Pentagon in serious plans to attack Iran
- Thread starter ZZZzzzzzzz
- Start date
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Fallacious argument built on the fallacy of a false dilemma.
Same stupidity as Bush's:
"You are either with us or against us."
Weak Z. Really weak.
The correct answer, of course would be "C". And, BTW, Z damn well knows it. He simply doesn't have the guts to admit it here on ET, where he is constantly portraying himself as a diehard liberal, in order to antagonize the other members of the community.
Don't underestimate Z. He is very intelligent and is highly skilled in provocative debate. Gotta say though, his response in this case is, again, weak.
He is far easier to pin down when he is confronted with directness. As you can see, when he was hit with the nut/daisy cutter bomb question, he was quickly disarmed/defeated.
Z, none of us are saying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was right. But, compared to what has occurred to U.S. military personnel, Abu Ghraib pales in comparison.
Quote from Sam321:
Of course, U.S. soldiers and Western civilians are first killed, then charred, then dragged on streets, and finally hung on bridges for the amusement of jumping and cheering Arab rent-a-crowds. But noooo. Olâ Seymore wonât touch that, because as a Citizen of the World, America needs to be kicked around.
Maybe if our soldiers were not there in the first case, then they wouldn't be subjected to those brutalities.
I think moe foes giving the opportunities to the enemy by letting our soldiers be there in Iraq (and their supporters) should be kicked around.
False dilemma fallacy.
Oh, and for those who are "Christians" where does it say in your Scriptures that you can break one of the 10 Commandments simply because it is not "as bad a sin" as the others....
"Z, none of us are saying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was right."
No need to rationalize it either, or attempt to diminish it through moral relativism.
Oh, and for those who are "Christians" where does it say in your Scriptures that you can break one of the 10 Commandments simply because it is not "as bad a sin" as the others....
"Z, none of us are saying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was right."
No need to rationalize it either, or attempt to diminish it through moral relativism.
Quote from BSAM:
Weak Z. Really weak.
The correct answer, of course would be "C". And, BTW, Z damn well knows it. He simply doesn't have the guts to admit it here on ET, where he is constantly portraying himself as a diehard liberal, in order to antagonize the other members of the community.
Don't underestimate Z. He is very intelligent and is highly skilled in provocative debate. Gotta say though, his response in this case is, again, weak.
He is far easier to pin down when he is confronted with directness. As you can see, when he was hit with the nut/daisy cutter bomb question, he was quickly disarmed/defeated.
Z, none of us are saying that what happened at Abu Ghraib was right. But, compared to what has occurred to U.S. military personnel, Abu Ghraib pales in comparison.
Well, well put.Quote from Sam321:
Of course not. Why? Because they are on our side.
Dumb Olâ Seymour thinks he is a Citizen of the World. He worries about troublemakers in Iraqi jails, because he canât tell the difference between our soldiers and the people who shoot them. Why? Because Olâ Seymour Hersh is First Citizen of the World Nation. He is above it all. And heâs willing to sell out his own country to prove it.
Dumb post WWII babyboomers. I swear. There are tons of them who think this way, and itâs dangerous as hell.
Of course, U.S. soldiers and Western civilians are first killed, then charred, then dragged on streets, and finally hung on bridges for the amusement of jumping and cheering Arab rent-a-crowds. But noooo. Olâ Seymore wonât touch that, because as a Citizen of the World, America needs to be kicked around.
Quote from Sam321:
They're war criminals decided by whom? A World Court? A Global Nation? Who defines these global platitudes? Kofi?
An entire generation of libs in the West has been fooled by this ridiculous concept, perhaps because they enjoyed an unusually long period of relative peace and prosperity all their lives. The world is a competitive place with competing interests. If America is cut down to size (which a lot of you wish for), the world will become a far more dangerous place, until there is a new dominant power. You should wonder about all the wars and genocide that didnât happen all because of Americaâs sheer power.
Roosevelt and Churchill would have been war criminals, but guess what? They won the war!
It is this arrogant ultra nationalistic US exceptionalism that is completely destroying any remnants of the reputation of the US right around the world. And I mean just about everywhere. Public opinion surveys almost universally show that Bush and the neocons are considered at least a big a danger to world peace as Islamic fundamentalism.
America almost certainly will be cut down to size, if for no other reason than the cost of imperialist wars will become unsustainable.
Americas military power stopping wars ? Laughable. It's right in the middle of one in Iraq that it initiated, for which all justifications were lies.
World War II was triggered by manifestly aggressive actions by Germany and Japan - countries with comparable industrial and military capacity to UK and the US. Trying to cast Iraq, Iran or any other Middle Eastern country in that mold is disingenuous.