Jordan 2, ISIS/L 1

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
Why do Americans feel entitled to talk about the rest of the world yet when someone says something about America you have to live there to know something about it? [/quote]

Americans rarely talk about Europe. How many threads in the last 5 years have revolved around Europe? [/quote]

My favorite thing about European criticism of American politics is the extent to which our friends across the pond are existentially indebted to us with each passing day. [b]I am not talking about the World Wars[/b]. Rather I refer to the fact that the present balance of the world remains in Western favor by way and only by way of American might and influence. To take one small example, I was just reading a book in which the argument was made that EU member states have become so techno-militarily dependent on the U.S. that they essentially can’t conduct more than a minor military operation without American help. Like I said, that’s just one tiny example.

So, the next time a European makes to hate on the terrible racist 'Murican people (and certainly there are many terrible and racist Americans – as if the same could not be said of the hooligans who join in Nazi chants after soccer games in Europe), please go ahead. But remember, while you do, that those 'Murican people pay and sink into debt and volunteer for a (yes, flawed) government and military apparatus without which you are an infant left to be suckled or mauled by real wolves.

This is a general note and not very much related to what’s being said in this thread, because I don’t care enough to follow it on the details.[/quote]

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

Also if this is the case is the U.S forever in the debt of France?[/quote]

You seem to be having a difficult time reading what I wrote, so I’ve highlighted the portion of my original post that, if you’re inclined to read it, will disabuse you of at least one of the misconceptions under which you’re operating. Even cathedrals begin with but one stone.

Now, more generally, may I ask what your point is? What your argument is? What contention are you out to defend here? To my recollection – and I could be wrong, because this discussion has taken what I would call a fucking boring turn, and I haven’t been paying much attention – you opened with the contention that people who use nicknames like “Obummer” are, by that very fact, racist. Am I right? If so, would you care to share a single shred of evidence or logical argument in defense of that contention? Note that “there are racists in America” does not come remotely close to the kind of evidence or argument you’re looking for.

The partisan bent of this place can be tricky. It can appear, at first, like a Breitbart-commentsish spot. It isn’t. The rules of good argument tend to apply strictly here.

Edited to fix quote.[/quote]

No i said people who do a combo of the things on the list below are most likely racist:

Make name puns on Obama when they never did it before
Say Obama is a muslim
Say Obama was born in Africa
Supported bush but are now mad at obama for continuing to cut civil liberties
Say Obama is marxist

Basic intuition would say if you have a guy who says multiple things on the list he might be racist.

[quote]smh_23 wrote:
If so, would you care to share a single shred of evidence or logical argument in defense of that contention? Note that “there are racists in America” does not come remotely close to the kind of evidence or argument you’re looking for.

[/quote]

You’re talking to someone who refuses to acknowledge a UN study that clearly (and proven with peer review) proves him wrong, not only in his original assertion, but in his refutation of the source itself, within it’s fucking preface. (Ie: it doesn’t take a lot of effort to see how dumb his responses to it are.)

You’ll get none of what you are asking for above, but we both already knew that. I just wanted to point out his problem with that study one more time, lol.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

America is the only place it means that. [/quote]

Right, and we’re talking about Obama, the President of the United States of America.

When we talk about the EU, we’ll be sure to give two shits what connotation libertarian has there. [/quote]

If you only care about America why discuss Jordan and Libya? How about Americans talk about every other country on here how about rather than moaning foreigners are tlaking about murica actually address the points or don’t comment?

Also there have been loads of threads on Europe, just use the search engine. Recent ones being greece.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:
If so, would you care to share a single shred of evidence or logical argument in defense of that contention? Note that “there are racists in America” does not come remotely close to the kind of evidence or argument you’re looking for.

[/quote]

You’re talking to someone who refuses to acknowledge a UN study that clearly (and proven with peer review) proves him wrong, not only in his original assertion, but in his refutation of the source itself, within it’s fucking preface. (Ie: it doesn’t take a lot of effort to see how dumb his responses to it are.)

You’ll get none of what you are asking for above, but we both already knew that. I just wanted to point out his problem with that study one more time, lol. [/quote]

Show me where the study mentions the fact America has 5 crimes that classify as violent crime and European nations have many, many, many more crimes that fall into that category? They don’t which is why the study does not tell the full picture.

But keep ignoring that fact.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

America is the only place it means that. [/quote]

Right, and we’re talking about Obama, the President of the United States of America.

When we talk about the EU, we’ll be sure to give two shits what connotation libertarian has there. [/quote]

Libertarian means left anarchist in the U.S too, there are left anarchst there who use the term. A few years ago right wingers started using it and now right wingers claim that is what the word means, despite it always meaning left anarchism. For hundreds of years.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]OGrady wrote:

In conclusion, don’t attack my beliefs – you don’t know them. [/quote]

You might want to step down off this high horse and be cognizant of the fact you aren’t the only person on the internet, or even this board, to come in here in the ridiculous way you did.

In fact, all this “satire” you’ve failed at delivering is very tired, and the least original approach people take when jumping in here.

You weren’t funny. You weren’t enlightening, and you weren’t doing anything but acting like an asshole.

Fucks I give about how I look = 0.

There are plenty of people who post here who’s opinion I do care about. Yours? Nope.

[quote] DO start to consider that if somebody is poking fun at you (which is all I have done) that there might be a remote possibility that you may have drawn a false conclusion in your argument.
[/quote]

I did consider it. Being as you choose to make stupid, unfunny, unoriginal posts your position became one of obvious troll, unprepared to actually address anything of substance.

Protip: none of us actually believe a single ounce of the nonsense you’ve written here. You got caught being stupid, and now you’re trying to backpedal and project your own short comings on others.
[/quote]

Man, you’ve got a lot of hate for me stemming from a relatively few words exchanged. The more you attack me, the more foolish you look. Rule #1 of dealing with my unoriginal and tired approach: don’t feed the trolls! I’m just trolling Brosef. I’m sorry if I genuinely offended you – I didn’t mean anything personally, just for a bit of fun.

Have a good debate y’all!

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Given the pushoverness of the GOP, and should they win in 2016, I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama’s ideological agenda is continued, despite their claims to being against his policies.
They’re all talk and no action, or at least not the action their voters elected them for, serving the same masters.
Biggest difference is that they’ll lie to your face about their priorities.
Seems almost like a one party system.[/quote]

Isn’t it possible that most of the parties agree on so many things because most Americans agree on so many things?

[quote]OGrady wrote:
The more you attack me, the more foolish you look. [/quote]

riiiiigggghhhhtttttt

That’s what is happening.

[quote]magick wrote:

Isn’t it possible that most of the parties agree on so many things because most Americans agree on so many things?[/quote]

To degrees yes.

But it isn’t because Americans agree as much as it is the attached.

EDIT: I guess I’m not even refuting the second part of what your saying. As much as adding a different slant to it.

[quote]OGrady wrote:
I’m just trolling Brosef.
[/quote]

Then how did you think people would react?

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
To degrees yes.

But it isn’t because Americans agree as much as it is the attached.

EDIT: I guess I’m not even refuting the second part of what your saying. As much as adding a different slant to it. [/quote]

I think the concept in your picture is overstated. Rather, I’d argue that most politicians have an egomaniac streak and genuinely believe that they are the only people for the job.

The Best Example of Derail ever.

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Now were just going to pretend libertarians are “leftist”?

lol, wow. This really just gets better with every post. It isn’t enough to confuse Contemporary Liberal with Classically Liberal, now we’re pretending the Left and Right on the spectrum are the opposite?

[/quote]

If you read properly, the term libertarian was created by anarchists in the 1600’s who were basically pre marxist communists. A basic history book could tell you that.[/quote]

OOOOHHHHHH, right, I forgot, we can just change connotation of words between 400 years of usage to adapt to our shit arguments.

Carry on fine solider. Carry on. [/quote]

America is the only place it means that. American pro capitalists basically took a name widely in use by a movement completely opposite from them a few decades ago and now you want me to use the new definition over the one used everywhere else?[/quote]

Please expound, dear. Expound.

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
To degrees yes.

But it isn’t because Americans agree as much as it is the attached.

EDIT: I guess I’m not even refuting the second part of what your saying. As much as adding a different slant to it. [/quote]

I think the concept in your picture is overstated. Rather, I’d argue that most politicians have an egomaniac streak and genuinely believe that they are the only people for the job.[/quote]

Really?

I mean, I’m not denying there are without a doubt some narcissist on both sides, do you think it’s a majority?

Maybe once were talking about POTUS, Speaker, Majority Leader etc… Sure.

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
The Best Example of Derail ever.[/quote]

Ya, no kidding.

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
Also there have been loads of threads on Europe, just use the search engine. Recent ones being greece. [/quote]

Looks like you search thread history about as well as you read that U.N. report.

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
Basic intuition would say if you have a guy who says multiple things on the list he might be racist. [/quote]

I think what you mean’t to type was, “Personal projection and overt generalization would say if you have a guy who says multiple things on the list he might be a racist.”

or something along those lines.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
Also there have been loads of threads on Europe, just use the search engine. Recent ones being greece. [/quote]

Looks like you search thread history about as well as you read that U.N. report. [/quote]

I wonder how many people here joined Greek message boards and started lecturing them on what is best for Greece?

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
Also there have been loads of threads on Europe, just use the search engine. Recent ones being greece. [/quote]

Looks like you search thread history about as well as you read that U.N. report. [/quote]

I wonder how many people here joined Greek message boards and started lecturing them on what is best for Greece?[/quote]

A whopping zero would be my guess.

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

If you only care about America why discuss Jordan and Libya?
[/quote]

Probably because American intervention played a hand in the rise of ISIS, which in turn was the catalyst for this thread.

lmao. This isn’t even fun anymore.