The most pathetic political arguments you ever heared.

Page 1 of 2 [ 23 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,207

22 Jul 2007, 3:50 pm

I saw this:

A: Are you for or against immigration?

B: I'm against illegal immigration b -
C: - You're only against immigration because you're a racist!! !!

:roll:

_________________
<a href="http://www.kia-tickers.com><img src="http://www.kia-tickers.com/bday/ticker/19901105/+0/4/1/name/r55/s37/bday.png" border="0"> </a>

JonnyBGoode
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 820
Location: Long Beach, CA

22 Jul 2007, 3:59 pm

Some other stupid slogans:

Bush lied, people died

No blood for oil

_________________
18:33. Press 'Return'

gekitsu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 693
Location: bavaria/germany

22 Jul 2007, 7:17 pm

there was this fun guy who thought it was an argument against what i said when he voiced the following:
"you are reactionary!"
and i was like: "okay, but what about the reasoning i put against your flimsy thesis?", to which he was like "thats reactionary!" and a tirade of how i should be banned from the forum, how my thoughts are crimes against humanity etcetera...

some forums are fun.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Jul 2007, 7:18 pm

JonnyBGoode wrote:

Some other stupid slogans:

Bush lied, people died

he did lie about iraq and people have died as a consequence of such action.

not to mention in going to iraq, he's proven the terrorists right and given them more recruiting power.

JonnyBGoode
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 820
Location: Long Beach, CA

22 Jul 2007, 9:28 pm

skafather84 wrote:

JonnyBGoode wrote:

Some other stupid slogans:

Bush lied, people died

he did lie about iraq and people have died as a consequence of such action.

not to mention in going to iraq, he's proven the terrorists right and given them more recruiting power.

He didn't lie about it. He went on the same information the rest of the world had and agreed upon, the same information Clinton had when he said that there needed to be regime change in Iraq. The intelligence was wrong. Doing something based on faulty intelligence is NOT the same as deliberately lying.

_________________
18:33. Press 'Return'

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Jul 2007, 10:13 pm

JonnyBGoode wrote:

skafather84 wrote:

JonnyBGoode wrote:

Some other stupid slogans:

Bush lied, people died

he did lie about iraq and people have died as a consequence of such action.

not to mention in going to iraq, he's proven the terrorists right and given them more recruiting power.

saying that iraq had direct connections and support for al quaeda and the terrorists who organized 9-11 and osama bin laden was a straight up lie and one of many lies told about why we're in iraq.

the closest to being correct is that he was trying to get chemical wmd's and really.....there's been at least 2 other wrong points before getting to that slighly reasonable one and the language used saying about how sure they were....with our abilities as far as gathering intellegence, there's no reason we should have gotten that wrong.

the declaration about saddam trying to get nuclear weapons from nigeria was also a straight up lie.

saying that iran is a direct threat to us is another lie.

calandale
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

22 Jul 2007, 10:33 pm

JonnyBGoode wrote:

There's also more than one way to 'lie'.
I certainly consider that deliberately suppressing
information which is in opposition to your views
a form of lying.

Though, this is a pretty common habit among US
Presidents trying to rally the country to war. People
don't like the idea of war (gee I wonder why?), but
nations seem to find them necessary - THIS I can't
quite figure. It's especially disgusting the manner in
which democracies go to war. At least little issues of
national honor make sense when we're talking some
despot. They are ridiculous when supposedly the
government is operating on behalf of the people, and
conning them into war.

Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

22 Jul 2007, 10:41 pm

sigholdaccountlost wrote:

I saw this:

A: Are you for or against immigration?

B: I'm against illegal immigration b -
C: - You're only against immigration because you're a racist!! !!

:roll:

"Racist" is the new "Witch".....it's kind of sad really.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

22 Jul 2007, 11:11 pm

Cyanide wrote:

sigholdaccountlost wrote:

I saw this:

A: Are you for or against immigration?

B: I'm against illegal immigration b -
C: - You're only against immigration because you're a racist!! !!

:roll:

"Racist" is the new "Witch".....it's kind of sad really.

racist is the new sexual harassment.

gekitsu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 693
Location: bavaria/germany

23 Jul 2007, 4:09 am

skafather84 wrote:

saying that iraq had direct connections and support for al quaeda and the terrorists who organized 9-11 and osama bin laden was a straight up lie and one of many lies told about why we're in iraq.

i see the point in the weaons of mass destruction part... well posible that the intelligence (and the interpretation thereof) was the problem. but i never remotely figured that reasoning out.
al-qaida has a very strict, extremist islam motivational core whereas husseins iraq was a worldly dictatorial state. if the usa werent the larger offender, states like the iraq would be on the target list of such groups just as well.
so, saddam supporting what is from his point of view a bunch of people taking religion to extremes that make them his enemies? unlikely. al-qaida taking support from what in their eyes is a sinner that is not as depraved as the usa are? just as unlikely...

sigholdaccountlost
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,207

23 Jul 2007, 7:04 am

Cyanide wrote:

sigholdaccountlost wrote:

I saw this:

A: Are you for or against immigration?

B: I'm against illegal immigration b -
C: - You're only against immigration because you're a racist!! !!

:roll:

"Racist" is the new "Witch".....it's kind of sad really.

True in a way. That is to say, that being called a racist today is equivalent to being called a witch way back then. There's no defense accepted. And anyone that defends anyone who is thought to be a racist/witch or their viewpoints must be a racist/witch themselves.

_________________
<a href="http://www.kia-tickers.com><img src="http://www.kia-tickers.com/bday/ticker/19901105/+0/4/1/name/r55/s37/bday.png" border="0"> </a>

jimservo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,964
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs

23 Jul 2007, 12:26 pm

I think the "war for oil" as an argument is really rather tired. I mean, the Iraqis themselves realize at this point we are not trying to steal their oil yet there are still some war opponents claiming this is what it is about.

I also am a bit bugged by complaints about corporate imposed high gas prices by people who oppose any domestic drilling, and want to regulate ethenel usage in automobiles.

gekitsu wrote:

al-qaida has a very strict, extremist islam motivational core whereas husseins iraq was a worldly dictatorial state. if the usa werent the larger offender, states like the iraq would be on the target list of such groups just as well.

I have never understood this argument. Saddam is secular Muslim therefor al-Qaida therefor AQ and Saddam would have to fight each other. Why? Documentation captured from the former Iraqi regime confirms AQ and Baathists had contacts of some kind. Also, an Al-Qaida affilated group was in Iraq during the Hussein regime, and Saddam authorized support and funding to numerous terrorists groups and individuals, including religious ones. Saddam himself adopted a less secular tones after his defeat in the Persian Gulf War.

Al-Qaeda has been documented to work with Shi'a, and more secular leaning extremists in the past, and has appears to have some personal in Iran right now.

The basis for the argument that religious extremists and more secular extremist cannot work together (and I am not arguing that Saddam was "in" on 9/11, although some of the participants may have used Saddam's terror connections) is simply that they can't by definition.

However, time and time again in history enemies (Hitler and Stalin being the most famous example, and of course later Stalin and the western democracies) have been willing to put aside their differences for the "greater good." I mean, it's not as if there isn't a history of Islamist extremists of various sorts working together in the past.

gekitsu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 693
Location: bavaria/germany

23 Jul 2007, 4:53 pm

its just that any secular state leader is a sinner if you hold muslim believes with a certain amount of extremism.
saddam may have put on a more cevout side after the first gulf war but that didnt make the power he wielded less secular.

jimservo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,964
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs

23 Jul 2007, 7:23 pm

gekitsu wrote:

its just that any secular state leader is a sinner if you hold muslim believes with a certain amount of extremism.

Hussein certainly is not a follower of Shafi`i subset of Sunni Islam (I am not getting into debates about what really isn't "true Islam" although believe me I have no objection about calling Osama an "infidel."). He tended (especially before the Persian Gulf War) to try to style himself as a new Abdul Nassar. Both during and after the Persan Gulf War he began to adopt a more religious motif (for example adding the phrase Allahu Akbar to the national flag in 1991) likely in an effort to gain support from individuals religious extremists rather then Middle Eastern nations, which had opposed his Kuwaiti annexation either formally or in the case of Jordan covertly.

gekitsu wrote:

saddam may have put on a more cevout side after the first gulf war but that didnt make the power he wielded less secular.

Oh, I don't make absolute claims to reading his personal religious beliefs. From what I understand from a biography I read he was was a Sunni Muslim but not what one would describe as a fundamentalist. He was intensely anti-Semitic habits. As for his OKing of working with terror groups that were on solid ideological groups, his idol Hitler did the same thing when he funded the forerunners of the Baathists.

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

24 Jul 2007, 1:36 am

Flagg wrote:

I wish I lived in the EU.

LOL no you don't. You just think you do. EU politics is just as bent and crappy as anywhere else.

As for "slogans".. well, its just a set of quick, easily remembered summations of various policies. Soundbites basically. People say these things, and they sound straightforward, but the amount of paperwork behind them is phenomenal. Also in just a handful of words, its easy to leave gaps you could drive an armoured division through. "Bush lied, people died" is the minimalist approach to a vast and unwieldy amount of info and argument, and it fits on a billboard. There's a poem it reminds me of, by whom i can't recall.

On atoms: Adam had em.

And finally.. regardless of politics, oil, and all that other stuff, let it not be forgotten that saddam was an unutterable b*stard who did a lot of unutterably b*stardy things. We arent talking about Mother Teresah here. He DEFINITELY invaded a sovereign nation for fun and profit. He wasn't in Kuwait for the golf.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

UncleBeer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: temporarily trapped in Holland

24 Jul 2007, 5:24 am

Macbeth wrote:

Flagg wrote:

I wish I lived in the EU.

LOL no you don't. You just think you do. EU politics is just as bent and crappy as anywhere else.

Hear hear! :lol:

Page 1 of 2 [ 23 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Jump to:

The most pathetic political arguments you ever heared. Post Reply New Topic

The most pathetic political arguments you ever heared.