Question for people that live in the USA

page: 22
41
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Iran is a peaceful country the propaganda against it is the same as Iraq they just want the central banks installed in there and to get their resources and to dominate them like the rest of the middle east. It's a big lie just like like all the other military-industrial complex lies. Anyone that buys it is an idiot.

Anyone for gun control is also an idiot. Just too stupid to even bother with.




posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I clarified myself and you five still kept at it. That was just as bad poor form.
Maybe next time don't concentrate on the package, but the content.


You stated that the analogy wasn't supposed to be part of the discussion, and only much later admitted it wasn't a good one, which is what we were saying. The analogy was the content.

In any case, if you still want to discuss some American "hypocrisy", I am still waiting for an example that shows what you mean. If that's the point of the thread, please offer the evidence, and we can get to it.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


That ring in your nose must be terribly uncomfortable. It must get even more annoying when the MSM grabs hold and leads you around. As far as I can see, only TPTB and their minions would be the only ones who oppose equality! Which side are YOU really on, to suggest this thread be closed? To me, that seems all TPTBish.


I don't use the MSM. Telling someone they should prove their point has nothing to do with equality, either. If a thread is opened on a premise that is false, it's a waste of time for everyone. To date, we still have not a single example offered demonstrating the implied "hypocrisy" of Americans, that the OP claimed he wanted to discuss. I have asked, more than once, for such an example, and have yet to see it. A thread based on a logic fallacy, followed by more of the same, should be closed.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I clarified myself and you five still kept at it. That was just as bad poor form.
Maybe next time don't concentrate on the package, but the content.


You stated that the analogy wasn't supposed to be part of the discussion, and only much later admitted it wasn't a good one, which is what we were saying. The analogy was the content.

In any case, if you still want to discuss some American "hypocrisy", I am still waiting for an example that shows what you mean. If that's the point of the thread, please offer the evidence, and we can get to it.


You need me to clarify it again!? Taking the analogy literally wasn't supposed to be part of the discussion. Here..let me copy and paste what a member said to me.




" I can clearly see that you are not discussing the second amendment or nuclear proliferation per se but rather, cognitive dissonance and issues surrounding the holding of two conflicting beliefs".

The deflection, obfuscation and ad hominem displayed by your chief protagonist in this thread, are the desperate palliative measures employed to reduce their considerable dissonance.

A great question to pose ....... unfortunately it was missed by nearly all of the threads respondents.


Clear enough now that it isn't only me that knows you missed the point?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


That ring in your nose must be terribly uncomfortable. It must get even more annoying when the MSM grabs hold and leads you around. As far as I can see, only TPTB and their minions would be the only ones who oppose equality! Which side are YOU really on, to suggest this thread be closed? To me, that seems all TPTBish.


I don't use the MSM. Telling someone they should prove their point has nothing to do with equality, either. If a thread is opened on a premise that is false, it's a waste of time for everyone. To date, we still have not a single example offered demonstrating the implied "hypocrisy" of Americans, that the OP claimed he wanted to discuss. I have asked, more than once, for such an example, and have yet to see it. A thread based on a logic fallacy, followed by more of the same, should be closed.


Wrong again, you just failed to see it, and I failed at trying to help you see it..that's all. No need for anger because some can while you can't. We can still be friends.

I'll star your post for you.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


I am more than willing to listen to an example that would prove your point. If you have one, please, offer it now. Nothing unfriendly about it, anyway. We can have differences of opinion and still be friendly! I have been known to star posts from "enemies".

In this case, if it makes sense, I am all for Iranian citizens arming themselves. I am not for their government developing nukes. I don't want my own government developing nation-destroying weapons, either. We already have them, but we aren't using those. Iran, I think, would do so. They would be likely to take themselves out, along with their enemies, in the tradition of suicide bombers. If that's hypocrisy, in your eyes, then I guess I am one.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 

I appreciate your civility and your attempt to answer my question. However, I also quoted exactly what I meant, as understood exactly, by another member from ATS. It is a couple posts back. Thanks! Star for you!



Edit: Here it is again, shortened to exactly what the crux of it is.



" I can clearly see that you are not discussing the second amendment or nuclear proliferation per se but rather, cognitive dissonance and issues surrounding the holding of two conflicting beliefs".
edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


Here is a much better analogy...

Americans deplore terrorism when perpetrated upon them by foreign powers but they continue to use terrorism against innocent civilians both at home and abroad.

Also..
Americans deplore terrorism when perpetrated upon them by foreign powers (think Al-Queda) but support terrorism when their government says it's ok. (supporting the FSA, think Al-Queda).

Are either of those two a little bit easier to follow? Or do neither make sense as well? I'm not actually asking you to argue for or against one or the other, but rather, to let me know why this sort of thing happens constantly and why it is so disregarded by the American public( in my opinion).

*DISCLAIMER AGAIN*
By saying American public I don't mean every single American, I mean quite a few that I have witnessed posting on ATS and on the MSM. I wouldn't lump all Americans together, that would be as ridiculous as my having to make this disclaimer so the few that are looking for any reason to attack me, instead of answering my question, will have no reason to now.
edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: spelling



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


I guess it is sort of like not allowing a person who has a record to own a gun or perhaps not allowing someone who is either too young or not capable of properly understanding the responsibility of using a gun to have one.

But in Iran's case...Iran signed a treaty to allow them the right to purchase Nuclear Tech. They agreed to the conditions and then they broke that agreement.

It is cut and dry.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


I guess it is sort of like not allowing a person who has a record to own a gun or perhaps not allowing someone who is either too young or not capable of properly understanding the responsibility of using a gun to have one.

But in Iran's case...Iran signed a treaty to allow them the right to purchase Nuclear Tech. They agreed to the conditions and then they broke that agreement.

It is cut and dry.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Bluesma
 


I guess it is sort of like not allowing a person who has a record to own a gun or perhaps not allowing someone who is either too young or not capable of properly understanding the responsibility of using a gun to have one.

But in Iran's case...Iran signed a treaty to allow them the right to purchase Nuclear Tech. They agreed to the conditions and then they broke that agreement.

It is cut and dry.

Split Infinity



Which would be kind of the truth, if Iran actually had nuclear weapons. They should really be going after the real criminals, Israel, who offered to sell nuclear bombs to another country.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 

I appreciate your civility and your attempt to answer my question. However, I also quoted exactly what I meant, as understood exactly, by another member from ATS. It is a couple posts back. Thanks! Star for you!



Edit: Here it is again, shortened to exactly what the crux of it is.



" I can clearly see that you are not discussing the second amendment or nuclear proliferation per se but rather, cognitive dissonance and issues surrounding the holding of two conflicting beliefs".
edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


Here is a much better analogy...

Americans deplore terrorism when perpetrated upon them by foreign powers but they continue to use terrorism against innocent civilians both at home and abroad.

Also..
Americans deplore terrorism when perpetrated upon them by foreign powers (think Al-Queda) but support terrorism when their government says it's ok. (supporting the FSA, think Al-Queda).

Are either of those two a little bit easier to follow? Or do neither make sense as well? I'm not actually asking you to argue for or against one or the other, but rather, to let me know why this sort of thing happens constantly and why it is so disregarded by the American public( in my opinion).

*DISCLAIMER AGAIN*
By saying American public I don't mean every single American, I mean quite a few that I have witnessed posting on ATS and on the MSM. I wouldn't lump all Americans together, that would be as ridiculous as my having to make this disclaimer so the few that are looking for any reason to attack me, instead of answering my question, will have no reason to now.
edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: spelling


It isn't possible to discuss why a thing happens without first discussing, and deciding, whether or not said thing happens.

You said, "Americans deplore terrorism when perpetrated upon them by foreign powers but they continue to use terrorism against innocent civilians both at home and abroad." Please explain what acts of terrorism American citizens are committing against innocent civilians abroad or at home. Terrorism is pretty specific. It is acts done to make people fearful in order to force a certain agenda. Thus, not every violent crime can be labeled as terrorism. Do you consider war the same as terrorism?



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


So instead of focusing on the one that you do understand exactly what I meant, you refocus the attention and ask vague leading questions in an attempt to obfuscate the thread again and the fact that you refuse to answer the question?


ter·ror·ism
[ter-uh-riz-uh m]
noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Heard of Ruby Ridge? Waco? MOVE Organization? All Domestic.

Heard of drone strikes? Overseas.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 12:58 AM
link   
My personal opinion towards Iran has always been just leave them alone. They aren't bothering us....,yet! Coming close to a nuclear device is not the same as having one. If it's even the truth. We should stop meddling in other peoples affairs until we get our own backyard in order.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by dreammerchant
 





We should stop meddling in other peoples affairs until we get our own backyard in order.


As should every country that wants to police national issues on a world stage. Thanks for the reply!



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


That ring in your nose must be terribly uncomfortable. It must get even more annoying when the MSM grabs hold and leads you around. As far as I can see, only TPTB and their minions would be the only ones who oppose equality! Which side are YOU really on, to suggest this thread be closed? To me, that seems all TPTBish.


I don't use the MSM. Telling someone they should prove their point has nothing to do with equality, either. If a thread is opened on a premise that is false, it's a waste of time for everyone. To date, we still have not a single example offered demonstrating the implied "hypocrisy" of Americans, that the OP claimed he wanted to discuss. I have asked, more than once, for such an example, and have yet to see it. A thread based on a logic fallacy, followed by more of the same, should be closed.


You are being less than honest saying that this thread is a waste of time while putting so much time and energy into it! If you do not use the MSM, then you are either a guide of it or a part of it as you mirror the same propaganda as they. You most likely think to this day that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. IMO, you are a paid dis-info agent trying to convince the American public that Iran is full of evil and should be wiped out, which is exactly what TPTB is trying to accomplish! If you truly believe this thread to be a waste of time, then simply move on. Or do you have an agenda to protect and project?



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ajay59
 


It doesn't pay to start an argument, the trolls have disappeared now that they have been shown that they were not arguing the point of this thread, only the words used. None of them even let us know their stance on it!

Where do trolls go when you stop feeding them? I hope they are safe.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


So instead of focusing on the one that you do understand exactly what I meant, you refocus the attention and ask vague leading questions in an attempt to obfuscate the thread again and the fact that you refuse to answer the question?


ter·ror·ism
[ter-uh-riz-uh m]
noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Heard of Ruby Ridge? Waco? MOVE Organization? All Domestic.

Heard of drone strikes? Overseas.


I focused on your new example, and asked for clarification. You did offer that, but you could not manage to do so without acting like it was somehow wrong for me to ask. If you don't want to debate, simply don;t, but if you do, just do, without all of the theatrics.

Now to your examples. Ruby Ridge and Waco were both terrible occasions, but I am not sure I would call them terrorism. Tyranny might be a better word. Mistakes could be another option. Certainly, there was serious overreaction on the part of the government in those cases, from all we can learn from the data.

Drone strikes in a war are not terrorism, either. Plus, you can't always trust the numbers offered in such cases. If our numbers match those of the ones protesting a strike, then I would believe them. Frequently, they don't match.

If you do consider those things terrorism, then, under your perceptions of those events, that would be hypocritical on the part of the government. Even in that case, I don't see that being on the part of the people.


Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by ajay59
 


It doesn't pay to start an argument, the trolls have disappeared now that they have been shown that they were not arguing the point of this thread, only the words used. None of them even let us know their stance on it!

Where do trolls go when you stop feeding them? I hope they are safe.


Who disappeared? I don't live here; I do have a life outside ATS. Impatient much?



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


That ring in your nose must be terribly uncomfortable. It must get even more annoying when the MSM grabs hold and leads you around. As far as I can see, only TPTB and their minions would be the only ones who oppose equality! Which side are YOU really on, to suggest this thread be closed? To me, that seems all TPTBish.


I don't use the MSM. Telling someone they should prove their point has nothing to do with equality, either. If a thread is opened on a premise that is false, it's a waste of time for everyone. To date, we still have not a single example offered demonstrating the implied "hypocrisy" of Americans, that the OP claimed he wanted to discuss. I have asked, more than once, for such an example, and have yet to see it. A thread based on a logic fallacy, followed by more of the same, should be closed.


You are being less than honest saying that this thread is a waste of time while putting so much time and energy into it! If you do not use the MSM, then you are either a guide of it or a part of it as you mirror the same propaganda as they. You most likely think to this day that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. IMO, you are a paid dis-info agent trying to convince the American public that Iran is full of evil and should be wiped out, which is exactly what TPTB is trying to accomplish! If you truly believe this thread to be a waste of time, then simply move on. Or do you have an agenda to protect and project?


I said that the premise offered wasn't accurate. I said that, if the OP wanted to discuss hypocrisy on the part of Americans, then he should be able to prove that such existed in the first place. So far, I still don't see that proven.

No, I am not in any way affiliated with the MSM. Not agreeing with your opinions, or those of the OP, doesn't make someone a media mouthpiece. The media, by the way, claimed there were NO WMDs in Iraq, so if I thought there were I would be disagreeing with them. You claiming there were not means you, not I, are in agreement with their claims.

As for Iran, when their leaders state time and time again that they want to destroy America (and Israel), then, yeah, I think they should not be allowed to develop nukes. I didn't state that they should be wiped out, however.

It's pretty clear one of us has an agenda, but that isn't me.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 





I said that, if the OP wanted to discuss hypocrisy on the part of Americans, then he should be able to prove that such existed in the first place. So far, I still don't see that proven.


Americans deplore terrorism when perpetrated upon them by foreign powers (think Al-Queda) but support terrorism when their government says it's ok. (supporting the FSA, think Al-Queda).

The above should be the clearest example.

Ruby Ridge, Waco and the MOVE organization were clear cut examples of terrorism perpetrated by government against its people. Also, there is the Kent State shootings. All of these are covered under the definition of terrorism (shown above) of point #1.



Drone strikes in a war are not terrorism


Think about that statement. Even if only one innocent was killed, would the drones not inspire terror to the people living there. What if a country was doing that to the states? What if it was your child that died as a result of bad intel? I don't even know why I bothered to respond to this ridiculous statement.



If you do consider those things terrorism, then, under your perceptions of those events, that would be hypocritical on the part of the government. Even in that case, I don't see that being on the part of the people.

Most people would consider them terrorism. The government represents the people and is elected by the people. To blame the government for all wrongdoings is either a simple way to duck responsibility, or an easy way to try and stop this discussion.

Edit: Plus with my example at the top of this post, it was Americans sending private donations to the FSA, as well as the government. A clear cut example of hypocrisy.
edit on 13-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


Edit #2:



Who disappeared? I don't live here; I do have a life outside ATS. Impatient much?

Who are you kidding? I see you on here all the time. If you didn't feel the need to respond, don't say you don't live here, you're here as much as me!
Also, I wasn't referring to you, you are actually engaging me in conversation.
edit on 13-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


Edit: I wonder how many days they are going to wait to respond now in order to prove me wrong?
edit on 13-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


What an unbelievably stupid post. Our guns have nothing to do anyone else. Guns are a domestic issue. The US wants to get rid of Iranian Nuclear potentials because they don't want another country to get nuked. I don't necessarily support our government getting involved, but there is a big difference man lol..





top topics
 
41
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join