Are you really an American?

reply to post by mishigas


I merely offered you some clarification on the definition of "Nation" according to a few dictionaries, which tend to be the traditional source of definitions for words.

If you choose to continue to pretend that your own personal definition trumps the official word, you are free to do so. Just as you are free to say 1+1=3. But it doesnt make it right.

An intelligent man would stop playing semantics games and admit to merely not understanding the definition of the word., according to several dictionaries. You lose nothing by admitting to not knowing the definition, and yet you risk complete sillyness by continuing to argue your claim. Why continue?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


You continue to deny the existence of borders in the definition of a nation. You cannot name one nation that is on the map that doesn't have borders.

You're right - arguing with you is pointless.

The apathetic "Americans" here are IMHO shameful.

"It's just land". Wow.

My ancestors arrived here in Delaware in the 1600's, and fought to create this land. Americans throughout history stood up for values and freedoms, but the latest generations seem to be completely apathetic, blind to history, blind to pride, and blind to values and feel like everything is entitled to them. This is what is wrong with America.today. .

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

You continue to deny the existence of borders in the definition of a nation. You cannot name one nation that is on the map that doesn't have borders.

You're right - arguing with you is pointless.

Seriously? STILL?

Just use a dictionary friend. Just use a dictionary.

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

You continue to deny the existence of borders in the definition of a nation. You cannot name one nation that is on the map that doesn't have borders.

You're right - arguing with you is pointless.

There are stateless nations (Palestine), enclave nations (Vatican), and even city-states (Monaco). Why are you insisting on pushing your non-definition? Nobody is going to take your word over Merriam-Webster. Not even if some senile actor who practiced voodoo economics said it.

reply to post by Cuervo

There are stateless nations (Palestine), enclave nations (Vatican), and even city-states (Monaco). Why are you insisting on pushing your non-definition? Nobody is going to take your word over Merriam-Webster. Not even if some senile actor who practiced voodoo economics said it.

Let's take your Vatican example:

There are eight accepted criteria used to determine whether an entity is an independent country (also known as a State with a capital "s") or not.

Let us examine these eight criteria in regard to the Vatican City, a tiny (the smallest in the world) country located entirely within the city of Rome, Italy. The Vatican City is the headquarters of the Roman Catholic Church, with over one billion adherents worldwide.

1. Has space or territory that has internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK).

Yes, the Vatican City’s boundaries are undisputed even though the country is located entirely within the city of Rome.

Vatican

Eight criteria, and we don't need to go past the first one to blow your argument sky high.

And referring to Ronald Reagan as a "senile actor who practiced voodoo economics" shows your ignorance and puerile level of thinking.

dbl post

reply to post by mishigas


Totally! Two plus two equals seven, and anyone who disagrees is a liberal obamabot shill!

7th line

reply to post by incrediblelousminds



Just accept the defeat gracefully. And get used to it; I'm sure there will be many more in your future.

How do you make a silent decision over a cup of nothing? Sounds like a story to me. Nice words, to be sure. Words are lovely, are they not?

reply to post by Konah


The Illuminati hijacked the "Secret Destiny of America". See Manly P Hall's book of this title. He references world democracy. This sounds frightenly like the NWO, except Hall was a theosophist with a spiritual outlook. It is clear that since the days of Columbus and Bacon, the sights of secret societies were set on America as an outpost for the New Age of Aquarius. Unfortunately, Soros and Kissinger and all TPTB have a stranglehold on America to finally get what they want, world socialism which these evil ones control. Hall and other Theosophists and people in the true secret societies had a richly spiritual vision of a society led by true leaders. Hall even talks about the Philospher-Kings who ruled Atlantis.
This book is worth the read, but remember that the NWO is the perversion of this Destiny of America.
www.scribd.com...

Originally posted by queenofsheba
How do you make a silent decision over a cup of nothing? Sounds like a story to me. Nice words, to be sure. Words are lovely, are they not?

I'm sure you have committed to some sort of mute conviction at one time or another. And yes, words are lovely. Even the ugly ones.

My family has been here in America since 1808. (Luckily, one of my relatives did all of the laborious work on the online family tree). It's amazing to be surfing the web, and find something like that. Had me, my brother, our father, and so on, and so on, all the way back to the first trip here in 1808 for an arranged marriage.

Check the sig to see where I stand in 2012.

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

In addition, I did not offer MY 'word', I offered a few references to dictionary definitions.

If you want to ignore what basically every dictionary offers as a definition that's fine, but you look awfully silly in the process.

Dusty old books need to be updated. And you are truly being silly if you discount the borders element.

Your definition is merely esoteric. Technically correct, but useless in today's modern terms. But stick with it...

And why don't you answer my statement about property lines? Because I gotcha, is why!

You know, I've been thinking about this perspective of yours, and I think I now agree.

Allow me to explain; a nation without borders is really a gobalist ideal, because it refers to vague ideas as a unifying factor, when you have clearly shown that a nation does not exist without borders. borders are what make a country Nation. IF you dont draw lines around everything, then it cant be clearly defined. We need more rules and control and lines, preferably enforced by a massive governmental structure.

great point!

Originally posted by totalmetal
reply to post by Cuervo

 

i was born here, and raised here, but it's just land.

You must be blind to culture then....

pity

reply to post by Cuervo


Am I an American? First and foremost? No. I am a Pennsylvanian first and foremost. Secondly I am a German American, but thirdly I guess I could call myself an "American".

reply to post by incrediblelousminds

You know, I've been thinking about this perspective of yours, and I think I now agree.

Allow me to explain; a nation without borders is really a gobalist ideal, because it refers to vague ideas as a unifying factor, when you have clearly shown that a nation does not exist without borders. borders are what make a country Nation. IF you dont draw lines around everything, then it cant be clearly defined. We need more rules and control and lines, preferably enforced by a massive governmental structure.

great point!

How about being mutually enforced by good natured, reasonable, co-operating human beings? Like our northern border?

Originally posted by korathin
reply to post by Cuervo

 

Am I an American? First and foremost? No. I am a Pennsylvanian first and foremost. Secondly I am a German American, but thirdly I guess I could call myself an "American".

Now that is a beautiful answer. I feel the same way as far as putting my patriotism into my state over the federal government.