How can we give them democracy if they insist on voting?

[LarzMachine]

Well it will probably surprise you to hear it, LarzMachine, but you and I actually agree on some things. The best thing we can do both for ourselves and the Middle East is end our nation's addiction to oil

So you aren't retarded. Big deal.

I've long regarded the Saudi theocracy as a danger to the rest of the world, even before 9-11.

ANY theocracy (or even really powerful religion) is a danger. I say nuke Jerusalem, Mecca and the Vatican as examples of how truly worthless their idiocy is.

I've also been to Communist countries and seen that system fail firsthand. Socialism gives me the creeps.

But Communism never failed! ESPECIALLY in the Soviet Union! What failed was a completely different system that CLAIMED to be Communism, but wasn't actually it! I had a short-term girlfriend last summer who actually said this (paraphrased, of course, since her version went on for hours and hours...). She later dumped Me for an actual Nazi.

And socialism should give anyone with a triple-digit IQ the creeps.

Your scholarly talents seem to know no bounds, so of course you know that all we know for certain is that the Sumerian writing system is older than the Chinese one.

So what? How does this change the fact that the modern Middle East is a shithole several centuries behind the times?

Again, somethng we have in common. I'm honored to have known as many soldiers as I have, and I'll go to my grave being proud of both them and my country, the USA, which I happen to believe is, whatever faults it may have, the greatest in the history of the world. I get the feeling you agree with me about that too.

I'll pay real money if anyone can produce proof the US isn't the most benevolent nation in history.

Since you mention your use of references, I'd be most interested in your source for this information. The history books I have all say that the Middle East was under the control of the Ottoman Turks until the end of the first world war.

History books. Outside the "cities" the Middle East was run by wandering desert raiders.

Some do, sadly. That's why we need to catch Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar, and the rest of the Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists and kill them. Interestingly, a lot of Muslims I've spoken to say the same thing. These same Muslims also tell me they find bin Laden particularly offensive because he defames Islam.

How exactly can one "defame" a religion by practicing exactly what it preaches?

I regard the people of the Middle East as being anything but savages (you will recall that my original post was applauding some of their civilized achievements).

Yeah, civilized achievments several thousand years ago. Again, should We hold modern Russians responsible for Stalin? Modern Germans Hitler (and fuck the ridiculous "Monarda law." It's a cop-out for imbeciles)? Modern England the colonial era?

They're in a hell of a bind, with authoritarian dictatorships on the one side and psychotic Islamists on the other. And yet the overwhelming majority of them, those ones you don't see on the news, still manage to live and laugh and love their kids. It's ultimately going to be up to them to solve their problems.

Dictatorships they supported and now stage retaliatory strikes on behalf of. If they're really so interested in solving their problems, why are they trying to put exactly the same ridiculous religion right back in power?

If we could reduce our reliance on their oil I think this would help.

Or nuke them. I'm perfectly OK with either one. Nuclear weapons also take out (or at least damage) the theocracy in everything but name known as Irael too, so I lean more toward nukes.

I have debate skills? Thanks!

Better than a LOT of idiots I've "debated" online. One of these putzes has taken the position that since Bush was off about WMDs, Saddam Hussein shouldn't have been removed from power, and when the fact Hussein was a world-class turd is presented, he resorts to calling me "Gandalf" because one of my hobbies involves games.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Anyone who calls you Gandalf hasn't read the books.

-Colly

 

[minsue]

The fact that they're still worshipping a glorified tribal chieftain (namely Allah -- or even the Judeo-Christian god) who tells them to treat their wives like slaves, people who don't worship their ridiculous god as targets, and to fly airliners into buildings because some people actually want to live in the present. Does any of that qualify? One of their own leaders sums up their refusal to join the modern world quite well:

"The earth is flat, and anyone who disputes this claim is an atheist who deserves to be punished." [Muslim religious edict, 1993, Sheik Abdel-Aziz Ibn Baaz, Supreme religious authority, Saudi Arabia]

It don't get much more clear-cut than that.

I read that as reasons why you feel all Muslims are living in the 18th century. Or, more specifically, Saudi Arabians. Plus, most of the reasoning you gave realy doesn't have anything to do with a different era or time. Belief in god? I'm an athiest and I'll never understand how people can believe, but I don't see it as something from another time. Flying airlingers into buildings? Definitely not 18th c. Treating wives as slaves and believing the world to be flat I'll certainly concede as belonging a few centuries ago, but you've offered nothing about Iraq. The only specific info at all is a quote from a man in Saudia Arabia.

I don't need a response, I originally asked out of curiosity for your reasoning, but I still don't see anything explaining why you believe Iraq is a few centuries behind.

 

[rgraham666]

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

Winston Churchill

Personally, for societies the size of ours, I think representative democracy is the best form of government. We are delegating our power to our representatives to do the work of running our country.

Direct democracy would be a lot of work. Do you plan on reading the entire budget every year and then vote on it? Do you plan on reading the proposed budgets and voting on those? How about abortion, gun control, creation science, an official religion and numerous other things? Do we want to deal with these things every day? That, in my opinion, is what direct democracy will come to.

So why is our system failing?

I believe it is for three reasons.

The first is that our educational system sucks. As I mentioned in another thread, it is now designed to turn out human resources and not human beings. Human resources make poor citizens.

The second is we seem to get our priorities backwards. We act as individuals when we should be acting as members of a group, that is as citizens. And we act as members of a group (and not as citizens, but as members of a political party or other corporation) when we should be acting as individuals.

The third is that many of us are no longer willing to sacrifice for our society. Many of us won't sacrifice our time, really won't sacrifice our money and paying in pain or blood is almost unthinkable.

For some reason, Edmund Burke is bouncing around in my mind.

Freedom is not solitary, unconnected, individual, selfish Liberty. As if every Man was to regulate the whole of the Conduct by his own will. The Liberty I mean is social freedom. It is that state of things in which Liberty is secured by the equality of Restraint… This kind of Liberty is indeed but another name for Justice…but whenever a separation is made between Liberty and Justice, neither is, in my opinion, safe.

And to finish off, my favourite political quote: Long live freedom and damn the ideologies.

 

[Guest]

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The truest thing I've ever read here!

I disagree. Our education system isn't designed to turn out ANYTHING. At somepoint administrators, teachers and legislatures got to gether and decided school was about socialization and not education. Even human resources need some skills and a basic education and we aren't even probiding that anymore.

-Colly

 

[LarzMachine]

I read that as reasons why you feel all Muslims are living in the 18th century. Or, more specifically, Saudi Arabians.

Yep. All religious fanatics are living several centuries behind the time by definition. Christians and Jews too. Anyone worshipping a glorified tribal chieftain has no right to claim membership in the modern world.

Plus, most of the reasoning you gave realy doesn't have anything to do with a different era or time. Belief in god? I'm an athiest and I'll never understand how people can believe, but I don't see it as something from another time.

Imaginary gods have no place in modern society. They were pretty well written off as pure BS centuries ago once people figured out disease and lightning weren't the act of POed spirits.

Flying airlingers into buildings? Definitely not 18th c.

This is one of the most obtuse examples of nitpicking I've ever read. What's next? Since they use the radio or TV to spread their dark ages idiocy, they must be modern?

Treating wives as slaves and believing the world to be flat I'll certainly concede as belonging a few centuries ago, but you've offered nothing about Iraq. The only specific info at all is a quote from a man in Saudia Arabia.

So now Iraq isn't part of the Middle East and therefore part of their idiocy? Do you watch the news? Right now Iraq is trying to install a theocracy based on their ridiculous dark ages thinking. Their sole concession to the modern world is that they'll at least pretend to give democracy a shot.

I don't need a response, I originally asked out of curiosity for your reasoning, but I still don't see anything explaining why you believe Iraq is a few centuries behind.

It explains quite well how the entire Middle East is several centuries behind the times. Iraq is the most advanced of the lot, and they're still behind the times as evidenced by their dark ages mentality.

 

[LarzMachine]

Anyone who calls you Gandalf hasn't read the books.

Yeah, he was dumb enough to think hobbits shouldn't be exterminated out of hand. That and I'm a better dresser.

 

[minsue]

Yep. All religious fanatics are living several centuries behind the time by definition. Christians and Jews too. Anyone worshipping a glorified tribal chieftain has no right to claim membership in the modern world.



Imaginary gods have no place in modern society. They were pretty well written off as pure BS centuries ago once people figured out disease and lightning weren't the act of POed spirits.



This is one of the most obtuse examples of nitpicking I've ever read. What's next? Since they use the radio or TV to spread their dark ages idiocy, they must be modern?



So now Iraq isn't part of the Middle East and therefore part of their idiocy? Do you watch the news? Right now Iraq is trying to install a theocracy based on their ridiculous dark ages thinking. Their sole concession to the modern world is that they'll at least pretend to give democracy a shot.


It explains quite well how the entire Middle East is several centuries behind the times. Iraq is the most advanced of the lot, and they're still behind the times as evidenced by their dark ages mentality.

I can see we're not going to get anywhere here, but I'll reply again if only because I can't resist the 'obtuse nitpicking'. (loved that, BTW!)

What I am trying to get from you is facts as opposed to opinions. Your posts come off as propoganda, IMnsHO, and therefore the message you are trying to get across is far less effective than it would be if you offered anything to back up your statements other than repeating that the Middle East has a 'dark ages mentality'. Instead of presenting an obviously well reasoned and considered opinion with the facts &/or research (I'm not talking a thesis paper here, either. Anything will do.) to back it up, you come across sounding as sane and believable as our current administration.

You've no idea my opinion on the matter, BTW, and yet you assail me and accuse me of ignorance for asking you to back up your own. I am sorry if I offended you. I suppose debating politics with the likes of Colly has spoiled me a bit.

Peace.

- Mindy the obtuse seriously, that made my day! I love it.

 

[LarzMachine]

What I am trying to get from you is facts as opposed to opinions.

Direct quotes aren't facts? Examples of how they treat theor people aren't facts? Oh, I forgot, to be considered factual, it has to agree with whatever bizarre agenda the far left is spouting this week.

Your posts come off as propoganda, IMnsHO, and therefore the message you are trying to get across is far less effective than it would be if you offered anything to back up your statements other than repeating that the Middle East has a 'dark ages mentality'. Instead of presenting an obviously well reasoned and considered opinion with the facts &/or research (I'm not talking a thesis paper here, either. Anything will do.) to back it up

So prove me wrong. Show how their ridiculous mindest is even remotely modern.

you come across sounding as sane and believable as our current administration.

In other words, perfectly sane and believable.

You've no idea my opinion on the matter, BTW, and yet you assail me and accuse me of ignorance for asking you to back up your own.

Again, if I'm so wrong, let's see some evidence to the contrary.

I am sorry if I offended you..

You've offended every intelligent person with your gleeful ignorance and defense of barbarians.

I suppose debating politics with the likes of Colly has spoiled me a bit.

True, you've become used to debating fellow flaming liberals. Kinda' like fighting a war against the French, no?

 

[minsue]

Direct quotes aren't facts? Examples of how they treat theor people aren't facts? Oh, I forgot, to be considered factual, it has to agree with whatever bizarre agenda the far left is spouting this week.

You gave a quote from a Saudi Arabian to explain why Iraq is wrong and you didn't give any examples. If I write that the Bush administration is a danger to our nation and the world, do you think I'm giving an example of how by then writing that they will lie, cheat, kill, and steal to serve their agenda? Of course not. That is still an opinion not an example.

So prove me wrong. Show how their ridiculous mindest is even remotely modern.

Leaving aside the fact that I haven't said you are wrong about Iraq only that you haven't said anything to back it up, which mindset? What is the mindset of Iraq as a nation and do you have anything objective to explain why do you think so?

In other words, perfectly sane and believable.

Again, if I'm so wrong, let's see some evidence to the contrary.

You've offended every intelligent person with your gleeful ignorance and defense of barbarians.

Wow. You are a true blue neocon aren't you? I had no idea asking you to offer facts rather than stating opinion as fact was defense of barbarians. I'm assuming it's also unamerican and unpatriotic, too?

True, you've become used to debating fellow flaming liberals. Kinda' like fighting a war against the French, no?

You're new to political discussions here.* For that I'll overlook your insulting assumption.

I'm done here now. This has been fun, but it's become quite circular and we could go on for years this way.

- Mindy

*Edited to add that I made an assumption there myself. I don't actually know if you've debated politics often in the past on the AH. I made the assumption based on the fact that you called Colly a 'flaming liberal' and that your name is not familiar to me. If I assumed wrong, I apologize.

 

[LarzMachine]

You gave a quote from a Saudi Arabian to explain why Iraq is wrong and you didn't give any examples. If I write that the Bush administration is a danger to our nation and the world, do you think I'm giving an example of how by then writing that they will lie, cheat, kill, and steal to serve their agenda? Of course not. That is still an opinion not an example.

No, I gave a quote by a Saudi Arabian to illustrate why the whole Middle East is backwards. Last time I checked, Iraq was part of the Middle East. They're more advanced -- last time I checked they aren't beheading people for looking at someone else's wife anymore.

Leaving aside the fact that I haven't said you are wrong about Iraq only that you haven't said anything to back it up, which mindset? What is the mindset of Iraq as a nation and do you have anything objective to explain why do you think so?

If you don't think I'm wrong about Iraq, why would you advocate the opposite side? Either you're playing Billy Jeff "What is the definition of is" games, or you're on drugs. So do you agree that the Middle East is several centuries behind the times (even when they steal someone else's airliners), or am I absolutely right about your erroneous beliefs?

Wow. You are a true blue neocon aren't you? I had no idea asking you to offer facts rather than stating opinion as fact was defense of barbarians. I'm assuming it's also unamerican and unpatriotic, too?

When you outright dismiss facts that don't defend your beloved barbarians, yep, you're defending barbarians.

You're new to political discussions here.* For that I'll overlook your insulting assumption.

In other words, I was right and now you're dodging.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

In other words, I was right and now you're dodging.

In my words, you don't listen worth a shit and are an outright asshole! Your method of arguing always means there is a winner and a loser and for the most part that's not how people on here prefer to argue. It's more about arguing points of significance/interest and opening one another's eyes to things we hadn't already seen. It's horribly arrogant to assume that your way is the only way to view things and being unable to back up your statements only makes you look shallow and ignorant.

~lucky

 

[Colleen Thomas]

No, I gave a quote by a Saudi Arabian to illustrate why the whole Middle East is backwards. Last time I checked, Iraq was part of the Middle East. They're more advanced -- last time I checked they aren't beheading people for looking at someone else's wife anymore.



If you don't think I'm wrong about Iraq, why would you advocate the opposite side? Either you're playing Billy Jeff "What is the definition of is" games, or you're on drugs. So do you agree that the Middle East is several centuries behind the times (even when they steal someone else's airliners), or am I absolutely right about your erroneous beliefs?



When you outright dismiss facts that don't defend your beloved barbarians, yep, you're defending barbarians.



In other words, I was right and now you're dodging.

I had been staying out of this. I felt after the flaming liberal comment you had already shown such monumental ignorance and arogance you weren't worth my time. But now you are claiming vicotry so I thought I would just speak up.

Your entire rant, and it is a rant not a debate or argument, comes down to a batch of naked assertions. Naked assertions are the tools of the sophist or the person who's views cann not be defended. Why? Because you cannot attack a naked assertion. Sophists have known this for centuies, but I won't call you a sophist, sophistry is an art that requires a good deal of itelligence to manage.

There is a reason you provide no evidence or proof to support your claims. Evidence and proofs can be attacked. They can be proven false, they can be proven to be faceitous. If you provide no proof, no evidence, no support then your naked asertion stands there safe and sound. All that is required of you then to claim victory is to be stubborn enough to keep making the assertions when people ask for evidence and refuse to give it. Or provide more asertions that don't relate to the request for evidence.

So you may claim your hard won victory. It is as hollow as your claims, however. The only person who thinks you won is yourself, and you have done not one thing to convince anyone else of your position.

Your posts here come down to a form of mental masturbation, where you jerk yourself off and then pat yourself on the back for how clever you are. It's juveinle. It's assinine. And in the end it's as childish as the "I know you are but what am I" comeback.

You have succeeded in "winning" and in doing so have convinced everyone here of only one thing. You are too mornoic to attempt a rational debate with. So pat yourself on the back, go out and celebrate your victory. I'll stick with the flaming liberals. I don't agree with them on much, but they at least believe strongly enough in what they say to debate it in a way that makes me open my eyes and look at their points.

-Colly

 

[minsue]

Lucky -

Colly -

Larzmachine - Give me a fact to back up your opinions, baby, any fact will do. Until then, have a .

- http://www.addis-welt.de/smilie/smilie/cool/4407.gif

 

[LarzMachine]

In my words, you don't listen worth a shit and are an outright asshole!

Ad hominem, abusive. Nice admission you have nothing to say.

Your method of arguing always means there is a winner and a loser and for the most part that's not how people on here prefer to argue.

In other words, you're going to cry because I didn't immediately surrender and say you're right in the absence of ANYTHING to contradict my position. In the real world, an argument DOES have a winner and a loser. Otherwise it's just pansies having tea.

It's more about arguing points of significance/interest and opening one another's eyes to things we hadn't already seen.

Like in some fantasy world where everyone is supposed to play nice like retarded children? Sorry, it doesn't work that way in the real world.

It's horribly arrogant to assume that your way is the only way to view things and being unable to back up your statements only makes you look shallow and ignorant.

I DID back up my statements. The only one refusing to back up their statements is you.

 

[LarzMachine]

(A bunch of whining and pathetic ad hominem attacks padded with really sad and patronizing verbal masturbation)

-Colly

I've already provided factual proof. Your (and others') refusal to accept that it could even be considered proof or factual only proves your desperation in clinging to this ridiculous far-left idea that the US must be evil and that the Middle East is somehow being preyed upon. Come out of your fantasy world, take off the rose glasses and see how the real world works.

And really, if you're so good at attacking facts and proof (as you imply), why haven't you attacked a single fact or piece of evidence I've provided? I provided plenty, yet the best you can do is the equivalent of a child plugging their ears and screaming "is NOT!" and spraying really sad ad hominem attacks.

And really, I LOVE the sad little attempt to claim victory. It shows your true colors pretty blatantly.

 

[minsue]

In other words, you're going to cry because I didn't immediately surrender and say you're right in the absence of ANYTHING to contradict my position. In the real world, an argument DOES have a winner and a loser. Otherwise it's just pansies having tea.

What IS your position??!? The Middle East is bad? Is that it?

Like in some fantasy world where everyone is supposed to play nice like retarded children? Sorry, it doesn't work that way in the real world.

You've got some odd fantasies, but that's neither here nor there.

I DID back up my statements. The only one refusing to back up their statements is you.

WHERE? HOW? WHEN? And what statements by Colly, Lucky, or myself are you referring to? All any of us has done is ask you for anything objective to show the reason for your opinions. This is truly inane and oddly amusing. I know I should just let this go, but I am compelled to see it through if only to see how many times we can go around in this bizarre dance.

- Mindy

 

[LarzMachine]

I disagree. Our education system isn't designed to turn out ANYTHING. At somepoint administrators, teachers and legislatures got to gether and decided school was about socialization and not education. Even human resources need some skills and a basic education and we aren't even probiding that anymore.

-Colly

Of which you're a perfect example. Don't let anyone tell you you're not perfect in any way!

 

[minsue]

I've already provided factual proof. Your (and others') refusal to accept that it could even be considered proof or factual only proves your desperation in clinging to this ridiculous far-left idea that the US must be evil and that the Middle East is somehow being preyed upon. Come out of your fantasy world, take off the rose glasses and see how the real world works.

And really, if you're so good at attacking facts and proof (as you imply), why haven't you attacked a single fact or piece of evidence I've provided? I provided plenty, yet the best you can do is the equivalent of a child plugging their ears and screaming "is NOT!" and spraying really sad ad hominem attacks.

And really, I LOVE the sad little attempt to claim victory. It shows your true colors pretty blatantly.

Where on this thread is that factual proof?? I honestly can't find anything remotely close to that. You gave one quote that wasn't even related to my original question since I was asking about your views on Iraq and you gave me a quote from a leader in Saudi Arabia. (Yes I know they're in the same geographic region, but an opinion a politician in Mexico states has nothing to do with how WE are as a country.)

Saying over and over again that you've 'provided plenty' doesn't make it so. Go back and quote it then! Show us stoopid wimmin what yer talkin about. You know you want to.

 

[minsue]

Of which you're a perfect example. Don't let anyone tell you you're not perfect in any way!

Who the fuck do you think you are to attack her personally like that? If you don't like her opinions, attack them all you want. Leave the lady alone, asshole. You've no idea what an ass you are being. This was all in good humor for me until this moment. Fuck off & die.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Friday Night Fever

Ad hominem, abusive. Nice admission you have nothing to say.

I said everything I had to say, but thanks for playing.

In other words, you're going to cry because I didn't immediately surrender and say you're right in the absence of ANYTHING to contradict my position. In the real world, an argument DOES have a winner and a loser. Otherwise it's just pansies having tea.

Are you related to RealguyUSA? Also, how do you take your tea?

Like in some fantasy world where everyone is supposed to play nice like retarded children? Sorry, it doesn't work that way in the real world.

If you think your views parallel the opinions of the real world, then I pity you.

I DID back up my statements. The only one refusing to back up their statements is you.

I never attacked any of your statments brainiac. (Hence my statement of fact that you don't listen/read worth a shit. Which you are backing up very nicely for me with every new post.) I was merely attempting to point out to the nice retarded child that they were way off base with the pissing and moaning, when asked a legitimate question to clarify a statement you made. Ever think of hopping back on the short bus and going back where you came from? I'll pay for gas.

~lucky

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I've already provided factual proof. Your (and others') refusal to accept that it could even be considered proof or factual only proves your desperation in clinging to this ridiculous far-left idea that the US must be evil and that the Middle East is somehow being preyed upon. Come out of your fantasy world, take off the rose glasses and see how the real world works.

And really, if you're so good at attacking facts and proof (as you imply), why haven't you attacked a single fact or piece of evidence I've provided? I provided plenty, yet the best you can do is the equivalent of a child plugging their ears and screaming "is NOT!" and spraying really sad ad hominem attacks.

And really, I LOVE the sad little attempt to claim victory. It shows your true colors pretty blatantly.

O.K.

You wanna dig your hole. I'll play along.

Your point is that the middle east is mired in the 12th centruy.

Number one, narrow your point to something with creedence. What 12th centruy socicety does it mirror? 12th centruy Japan is far different societally from 12th century Mezzo-america. !2th centruy europe is far diferent from 12th century sub-sharan Africa. So prove you have a grasp first and fore most to copmpare anyting to the 12th century.

Numer two, prove you have a grasp of any middle eastern society from which to draw your opinion. They aren't all the same. Jordan and Saudi Arabia are kingdoms, you also have emerites, and parlimentary forms of government as well as dictatorships masqurading as islamic states (syria) and true islamic states like Iran.

Numer three, once you have proven you have a grasp on some societal aspect of the 12th centruy and some societal aspect of a modern middle eastern country do the comparitive analyisis that you believe supports your claim.

And then I will debunk it.

If you can't do any of the above, then everyone on this thread will know once and for all, without doubt that you are just running your mouth, using childish attempts at sophistry and circular logic to mask the fact that you have bull puckeys between your ears.

I await your reply with bated breath

-Colly

 

[LarzMachine]

Who the fuck do you think you are to attack her personally like that?

The guy she attacked personally. What's wrong, it isn't considered fair play to treat people exactly as they've treated me?

If you don't like her opinions, attack them all you want. Leave the lady alone, asshole. You've no idea what an ass you are being. This was all in good humor for me until this moment. Fuck off & die.

Oh no! A hissyfit!

 

[LarzMachine]

Where on this thread is that factual proof?? I honestly can't find anything remotely close to that.

Are you actually illiterate, or are you just incapable of accepting reality?

You gave one quote that wasn't even related to my original question since I was asking about your views on Iraq and you gave me a quote from a leader in Saudi Arabia. (Yes I know they're in the same geographic region, but an opinion a politician in Mexico states has nothing to do with how WE are as a country.)

When all the countries believe in the same ridiculous religion to the point they'll blow themselves up for it, then proof for one is proof for all.

us stoopid wimmin

You said it, not me...