[QUOTE=tomndebb]
magellan01, you are simply lying.
My only entry into the thread last night was to urge you to back away from your habit of making all discussions personal. Your “detailed response” was not even relevant as a response to me. It might have been relevant in your earlier response to RedFury when you chose, instead, to dismiss his observation with a personal remark, followed by a cryptic reference to a dictionary definition while failing to address his actual post.
[/quote]
Oh, brother. Here we go again. I suggest you go back and reread. The substance of your initial post to me was the my use of a definition from an etymological dictionary. In fact, let me help you. Here is your post:
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Y’know, claiming that a poster’s “education did not take” and then providing a simple dictionary definition after that same poster has provided a citation to a report that notes the difficulty that real life people and courts of law have had wrestling with the real world application of the word is rather silly.
Your snide comment is not moving the discussion forward and your dictionary definition really provides no rebuttal–the more so since, of all the definitions open to you, you chose to rely on the etymological dictionary. Now, there is no one on this board with a greater love of etymology than I, (some love it as much), but an abbreviated etymology only shows origins, not specifically current usage.
[/QUOTE]
While you mentioned my “education did not take” line, and didn’t like it, it seemed clear to me—then and now—from the words in your post that the problem you had was with my attempting to assist in said education by providing a definition from an etymological dictionary. I’ve explained that I intentionally chose that one as a more general definition had already been supplied by another poster, and that maybe seeing who coined the term and why—in addition to the generally accepted definition already supplied—would clarify things. I would say you had a point if I had sought to have the whole argument rest on the etymological dictionary definition alone. But, I didn’t.
Oh, and you’re a liar, lying about me lying. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Since I was not expressing any views regarding the matter of genocide, your decision to paint the U.S. experience as some wonderful, altruistic endeavor, then pose a question with an excluded middle that I either agree with your (off-topic to my comments) characterization of the war or that I side with a particular poster well known to be hostile to the U.S., you were pretty clearly attempting to make a personal comment about me.
You have now disingenuously claimed that I am the one who is making the matter personal. If you would stick to actual discussion points and leave the beliefs and personalities of other posters out of your comments, I would not have to keep addressing you for your antagonizing behavior toward other posters.
[/QUOTE]
Nothing disingenuous about it. There’s no question about the fact that you’ve got a bug up your ass about me. And my desire is to not deal with you at all, for reasons I’ve previously stated clearly elsewhere. Now, if you would kindly go back and reread your initial post I supplied you might see that the substance of your post was the definition I supplied, not what you later characterized as an attack on another poster. Or at the very least, how a reasonable person might have thought that was the substance of your post. Please, reread it.
As far as my “personal comment” about you (“question” to the rest of the world). A simple “no” or more nuanced response was all that was needed. But just to be fair, let’s take that line in context. Here is the paragraph:
[QUOTE=magellan01]
And I don’t see how either of those cites changes anything. The first one tasks itself with defiingin it as genocide, the second merely states that the term is sometimes wanting. But the articles broader guidelines do not push our role in Iraq into it. For one, we are actually trying to help the Iraqi people. Or are you one of those who shares the “insightful” views of Der Trihs, et al.
[/QUOTE]
Now, will you stop the diversionary hijack? As you say, if you must, take it to the Pit.