Wallstreet Is Total Manipulation!!!

there were far more than just australia. there were approximately 40. however, that was not the point. you claimed there was one

i disproved your claim by naming 2. australia and the UK

and you admitted such, even if u did it in a hedgy sort of way

which is what you'd expect on a trading forum :)

(get it... hedgy? i'll be here all week folks)

and you are correct that australia did not send a lot of troops. that's not the point. the point is that your claim was wrong. and i showed it to be so.

it is also true that apart from the UK and the US, most other nations sent (relatively) small #'s (not as blindingly so in reference to their relative population sizes, but still a small # per capita and still much lower per capita than the US did. heck, some nations sent less than ONE HUNDRED TROOPS!)

if you had claimed that, i wouldn't have called you on that. cause that is true

the truth has a dignity all its own

hth
 
Quote from whitster:

there were far more than just australia. there were approximately 40. however, that was not the point. you claimed there was one

i disproved your claim by naming 2. australia and the UK

and you admitted such, even if u did it in a hedgy sort of way

which is what you'd expect on a trading forum :)

(get it... hedgy? i'll be here all week folks)

and you are correct that australia did not send a lot of troops. that's not the point. the point is that your claim was wrong. and i showed it to be so.

it is also true that apart from the UK and the US, most other nations sent (relatively) small #'s (not as blindingly so in reference to their relative population sizes, but still a small # per capita and still much lower per capita than the US did. heck, some nations sent less than ONE HUNDRED TROOPS!)

if you had claimed that, i wouldn't have called you on that. cause that is true

the truth has a dignity all its own

hth
More...

You must have difficulty reading.

I said 1 other nation besides the US. That's the UK. Considering that there were only 4 total who contributed anything (this 4 INCLUDES Iraq itself), and Australia's 2000 troops (that's pretty pitiful, I already pointed out that more than 3000 US troops have DIED since then, and even Australia gave 2000 troops for Afganistan, which was not a 'war').

40 nations paid lip service perhaps. They contributed a big fat nothing. Go look at the wikpedia link I sent you.

You can backpedal your ass off, but YOU said that MANY countries supported the war, and named the ONLY other country besides the US and the UK as 'many'.

I did not consider Australia's 2000 troops during a WAR a contribution. There have been more troops sent for 'peace-keeping' missions in the past, and right now there are more US servicemen stationed on individual bases all over the world that number more than 2000. We're not in any other war right now.

Talk is cheap, verbally saying 'I support the war' isn't the same as being committed enough to send your own sons and daughters to die in it.

Australia sent a token force to appear interested, while they paid the political price in protest at home.

I stand by what I said, and if you read it in context, nothing you have said since has been anything but misconception on your part, or blatant twisting of the facts. Again, 1 is not 'many'. And go back and learn to read. The Iraq war was fought and supported by 2 world leaders only. The US and the UK. Anything else was too small to consider.

You must be having a crappy trading day to be running around the forum barking and growling at everyone. And yet again, you don't answer my question. Could it be because your technique isn't very successful?
 
Its all a load of left sided bollax!!

....simple fact is, the markets have been pumped up FAR TOO HIGH, the correction will be RUTHLESS!!

Level 4 target for the DOW remains at 9000
Level 4 target for the FTSE remains at 4700

Rio target £23
BLT target £8
CNE target £15

Hope this helps
 
Quote from hels02:

You must have difficulty reading.

I said 1 other nation besides the US. That's the UK. Considering that there were only 4 total who contributed anything (this 4 INCLUDES Iraq itself), and Australia's 2000 troops (that's pretty pitiful, I already pointed out that more than 3000 US troops have DIED since then, and even Australia gave 2000 troops for Afganistan, which was not a 'war').

40 nations paid lip service perhaps. They contributed a big fat nothing. Go look at the wikpedia link I sent you.

You can backpedal your ass off, but YOU said that MANY countries supported the war, and named the ONLY other country besides the US and the UK as 'many'.

I did not consider Australia's 2000 troops during a WAR a contribution. There have been more troops sent for 'peace-keeping' missions in the past, and right now there are more US servicemen stationed on individual bases all over the world that number more than 2000. We're not in any other war right now.

Talk is cheap, verbally saying 'I support the war' isn't the same as being committed enough to send your own sons and daughters to die in it.

Australia sent a token force to appear interested, while they paid the political price in protest at home.

I stand by what I said, and if you read it in context, nothing you have said since has been anything but misconception on your part, or blatant twisting of the facts. Again, 1 is not 'many'. And go back and learn to read. The Iraq war was fought and supported by 2 world leaders only. The US and the UK. Anything else was too small to consider.

You must be having a crappy trading day to be running around the forum barking and growling at everyone. And yet again, you don't answer my question. Could it be because your technique isn't very successful?
More...

I'm only half paying attention and I know Japan sent troops in their first deployment since WWII. South Korea sent troops also.

But, hey, your point is to have a masturbatory left wing rant, facts be damned. Enjoy! :D
 
exactly. why does he need facts when he has ideology to espouse?

incredible

i told you i was expecting intellectual dishonesty, but holding out hope that it wouldn't emerge

i waited.

it did.

sad.

that's one thing that i prefer about trading vs. politics. in politics, people will lie, engage their cognitive dissonance engine, obfuscate, and ignore inconvenient facts

in trading, you can't play that game. your account is the ultimate truth. you can THINK you are right all you want. but the market is the ultimate arbiter and if u insist you are right, when u are wrong, your account will let u know the truth


and then of course, the whingers will whine about MANIPULATION

lol
 
Quote from whitster:

that's one thing that i prefer about trading vs. politics. in politics, people will lie, engage their cognitive dissonance engine, obfuscate, and ignore inconvenient facts

in trading, you can't play that game. your account is the ultimate truth. you can THINK you are right all you want. but the market is the ultimate arbiter and if u insist you are right, when u are wrong, your account will let u know the truth
More...

Absolutely freakin' right. That's what I like about trading compared to a lot of things. You can't run from the truth about your P&L. It is what it is.

Quote from whitster:

and then of course, the whingers will whine about MANIPULATION
More...

Yep. "The man's keepin' me down! It's not my fault!"
:D
 
you're all MANIPULATED ! by just answering the question! yes the market will fall ! WHEN ITS READY! TARDS TARDS TARDS! MAYBE TOO EDUCATED TARDS!
 
everyone is just too bullish on cnbc....many have raised their forecasts going into 2007.

Im waiting patiently for tomorrows PPI and housing data.
 
u can still be selectively short.

heck i made $15 today on a DIA put, while i was scalping Crude, Corn, and the dow :)

but everybody wants to be a hero and call the top.

reminds me of that old joke about economists predicting 25 of of the last 5 recessions :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top