Thunder – if you ever run for national office, let me know. Man, I want to vote for you and I’m not kidding. Your ideas are refreshing and realistic.
Let’s hope that at least some of the idealism and sense of justice embodied in the American people and their government wears off onto the world someday. Ideas like voting, rights, free trade, are the quintessential characteristics of Americans. Dare the world copy our example?
[quote]Damn vroom - you have been embarassed on this thread so many times that it’s actually sad, yet you keep on going.
You have put forth the idea that the U.S. employs a ‘might makes right’ foreign policy. So yes, there are people on here saying that ‘this is what the U.S. is doing right now’. You are one of them.
Geez, boy - is your memory really that bad, or are just doing your best John Kerry immitation? [/quote]
Hey, dicksmack, the ‘might makes right’ concept was espoused on another thread concerning rational neocons – and was proposed by the blogger originally quoted. The whole thing was a theory or stance proposal.
The only thing embarrassing around here is your blatant attempts to take sides and get involved in the middle of the conversations that you don’t actually seem to be able to follow with your snide insults and jibes.
Grow up some time.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Damn vroom - you have been embarassed on this thread so many times that it’s actually sad, yet you keep on going.
You have put forth the idea that the U.S. employs a ‘might makes right’ foreign policy. So yes, there are people on here saying that ‘this is what the U.S. is doing right now’. You are one of them.
Geez, boy - is your memory really that bad, or are just doing your best John Kerry immitation?
Hey, dicksmack, the ‘might makes right’ concept was espoused on another thread concerning rational neocons – and was proposed by the blogger originally quoted. The whole thing was a theory or stance proposal.
The only thing embarrassing around here is your blatant attempts to take sides and get involved in the middle of the conversations that you don’t actually seem to be able to follow with your snide insults and jibes.
Grow up some time.[/quote]
So are you saying that you only defend what comes out of your mouth in the thread that it comes out in? It is applicable in this thread. I used it. I don’t see the problem.
Dicksmack? You call me a dicksmack and then tell me to grow up?
I am not snide. My insults are open, honest and in your face. You are a laughing stock. You bitch whine and cry like a fucking estrogen filled pre-op tranny, and then you tell others to do the growing up.
Fucking priceless.
Unfortunately, it appears you really don’t understand what you are reading, instead happily throwing insults in your ignorance.
See if you can follow along…
The other thread was a discussion of stance or policy.
It appeared to suggested that the US should employ a might makes right policy.
I argued against such a policy, due to the problems inherent within it.
So, I don’t know what you think it is I should defend.
Are there instances of the US acting in a might makes right capacity that you’d like to point out to me or something?
Which actions did you mistakenly think I had applied my policy stance towards? There you go again, pretending that I had said something so that you could argue against it.
That’s a pretty lame tactic assjack.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Unfortunately, it appears you really don’t understand what you are reading, instead happily throwing insults in your ignorance.[/quote]
And you throw insults out of frustration of being so damn evolved? Assjack? Dicksmack? I understand how it can be frustrating for one so logically challenged as you are in in this thread. But to call me names out of frustration is more telling of your weak argument than it is anything else.
[quote]See if you can follow along…
The other thread was a discussion of stance or policy.
It appeared to suggested that the US should employ a might makes right policy.
I argued against such a policy, due to the problems inherent within it.[/quote]
You have made the same accusations in this thread. Now these are you words that - at least to me - suggest that you are convinced that either the government, or conservatives, or both are in favor of, or already employing a “might makes right” policy
[i]Anyway, it is funny to see that a country founded because of revolt from the British Empire – arguably the best or most advanced and powerful civilization at the time – now has citizens that effectively want to become the new Empire.
Is it just me, or are conservatives apparently all about controlling the world. Everyone must agree with all of my principles. Everyone must do only actions that I deem appropriate.
Nah, fuck that, people should be tortured, countries should be invaded for preemptive reasons under crappy intelligence and we need to remove those inconvenient rights that citizens always use to avoid government control.
Anyhow, if I was in the US, yes, my rights would have been (potentially) altered. Secret government snooping powers and detention powers are not things I like. Governments are not to be trusted with such tools.[/i]
There are a lot more vroomisms on this thread that makes it abundantly clear that you think the U.S. is little more than a selfish bully hellbent on pissing in everyone’s boots.
But no you haven’t said a damn thing that you should have to defend. How could you? You don’t believe in using facts - especially when they collide with your bulbously large ego.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
But to call me names out of frustration is more telling of your weak argument than it is anything else.
[/quote]
Boohoo. Rainjack, you are the most argumentative and rude poster in the forums nowadays, you don’t get to cry when people get tired of your yipping and respond in kind.
Accusations? Okay, who, if it isn’t conservatives, have been arguing that might makes right in these threads? Would you like me to blame some other political affiliation for that attitude as displayed in the forums?
A bit out of context, but really, when people are arguing that the “US should be in charge of the world” you don’t see it as people desirous of a new empire? Were the people arguing that point not of a conservative stripe?
I really am starting to think you are missing something mentally. You can’t follow along and see that people are arguing the US should run the world, and the fact that I’m outlinng the dangers of that as seen through the worlds eyes?
I’ll support anything I wrote, in the context of the discussion it was in. If you wan’t to drag shit out in a standalone fashion and make up my stance so you can argue against it, you don’t deserve the time of day.
Do I think some people in the states have a might makes right mindset? Yes, sure I do. Do I think some in the current administraton have the mindset? Yes, sure I do. Do I think it is not in the best interests of the US to pursue policies of that nature? Yes, that is what I think.
What do you feel I need to defend? Do you feel I am mistaken? Fine, then show me why I’m wrong in my views. To bitch and cry and lash out because you don’t like my opinion just makes you look like a big pussy.
Stop it already. It’s embarrassing.
Again, when not taken out of context and twisted into something I didn’t say, I’ll stand behind anything I’ve said. The fact that you like to seek out interpretations that let you take offence is really not my issue…
[quote]vroom wrote:
Boohoo. Rainjack, you are the most argumentative and rude poster in the forums nowadays, you don’t get to cry when people get tired of your yipping and respond in kind.[/quote]
I think you have that position pretty well sewed up. But anyhow - I am not crying. I am pointing out your blatant hypocrisy. I have even told you to try harder if you are going to call me names - I am hardly one that is crying. I just find it more than a little hypocritical for you to brated me for being insulting, when you are the most insulting person on here.
I don’t care who you blame. You are the one that said:
[i]"vroom wrote:
Nobody (here) is saying that this is what the US is actively doing right now - are they?
However, there are those on this very thread suggesting that the US should be doing this.[/i]
I listed a bunch of quotes that showed that you do indeed think that most of us from the right - including the President - employs ‘might makes right’.
[quote]Anyway, it is funny to see that a country founded because of revolt from the British Empire – arguably the best or most advanced and powerful civilization at the time – now has citizens that effectively want to become the new Empire.
A bit out of context, but really, when people are arguing that the “US should be in charge of the world” you don’t see it as people desirous of a new empire? Were the people arguing that point not of a conservative stripe?[/quote]
No - it was not out of context - unless you are willing to admit that everything you have said on this thread is out of context.
No - I see it as people thinking that since we are looked to as leaders - we should conduct ourselves as such. That includes taking charge. To think that is equitable with building a new empire is pure stupidity.
I haven’t seen anyone say that the U.S. should “run the world”. You haven’t either. You are the one taking things out of context and spinning them to support you own bullshit ideas. Taking charge and acting like leaders is not running the world like you suggest it does.
So now YOU - the lazy fuck that won’t use facts to support his positions is lecturing me on how to use proof? That is rich. The quotes I used were from a post that you admitted to being random thoughts. Please give me some guidelins as to what context ‘random thoughts’ should be viewed in. Please.
There - that’s what I have been waiting for you to say. Was it so hard? DO you feel as if you have been painted into a corner? Did I put any words in your mouth? Are you actually going to stand by this? Or will you employ the 5-D’s, if you are held to this position?
Zzzzzz.
Clue train…
Taking charge or exhibiting leadership is very different than being in charge.
The question was asked repeatedly about who should be in charge.
What was your first language anyway?
[quote]vroom wrote:
Taking charge or exhibiting leadership is very different than being in charge.
The question was asked repeatedly about who should be in charge.
What was your first language anyway?[/quote]
What is the definition of ‘is’?
Those who take charge are in charge. You are splitting hairs in an attempt to snake your way to a new position. Classic vroom.
You are the one saying that because we take charge we are trying to set up a new empire. That might makes right is a bad thing. That the world hates us because we are the world leaders. If I am not mistaken, you even doubted that we were in fact the richest, most powerful, and the best nation on earth.
Dude - if the clue train comes by - you should rob that motherfucker and get way more than just one clue. You need a shit load.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Those who take charge are in charge. You are splitting hairs in an attempt to snake your way to a new position. Classic vroom. [/quote]
No, there is difference between playing a leadership role, showing by example, and actually being in charge and dictating to others.
Really, dude, learn to read before you go around with all your baseless accusations. This is tiresome. Aren’t you the same clown that was recently telling people that words have meanings or something.
Anyhow, perhaps you missed it, but folks were arguing about who should be in charge. Who should call the shots. Who should dictate to the rest of the world. Maybe you missed that part?
[quote]You are the one saying that because we take charge we are trying to set up a new empire. That might makes right is a bad thing. That the world hates us because we are the world leaders. If I am not mistaken, you even doubted that we were in fact the richest, most powerful, and the best nation on earth.
[/quote]
You are such an idiot. Might makes right is a bad thing – yes, that much you actually got right. The rest is you doing a whole bunch of flag waving for whatever reason.
Is it too much to ask you to follow along with a conversation if you are going decide to pick fights about it later?
Some folks had suggested that the US should police the world, dictate in a sense, how other countries conduct themselves. This was sandwiched in with the might makes right philosophy such that the US would force countries to do so – in that conversation.
If using military might around the world to have everyone fall in line with the world police doesn’t sound somewhat like an empire to you, I don’t know what does.
Anyway, again, the fact that these items were discussed and proposed by some rather silly people does not mean that I was arguing that it is currently taking place.
You do know what a hypothetical situation is right? You understand the concept of arguing about ideas… as opposed to real world events? About asking questions and conversing based on various possible answers?
Perhaps you should figure out the true context of the conversation before trying to say I’m attacking truth, justice and the American way.
Honestly, it obviously wasn’t english, so what was your first language?
Vroom - you are just going around in circles ducking and dodging and trying to twist yourself into not being responsible for the things you have said.
You have been chastized by everyone you have decided to go up against, and you have been soundly thrashed everytime you open your stupid mouth.
I’ve seen it all. I have heard it all. Until you can come up with something new - just keep you fucking opinions and self-adoration on your side of the border.
The U.S. will do what it wants - when it wants.