I have to say I find your obsessions more than weird (to be frank, it’s not so much the topics themselves that your unrelentness in bringing them up). But, one thing that keeps coming up and I really cant explain is your obsession with Rodhesia.
Could you explain why it means so much to you and why do you feel the need to refer to it in every other post? Thanks.
P.S: this is my first thread started in the Pitt, but it is not meant to be a Pitting at all. I just couldnt think of a more appropriate forum for my question (personal controversial question).
Like a PM? Or asking him directly when he brings it up?
Could you explain why a search of “Rhodhesia” brings up exactly one thread on this board (this one)? Argent Towers has quite a few weird quirks and obsessions, but I have no idea what you’re talking about here.
Do you ever read the great debates threads about Africa? If you don’t, you probably haven’t noticed it but it’s very very important to AT that people agree that racist rhodesia was an economic powerhouse that the mean old US and UK shut down in some sort of politically correct snit.
Look, Capitaine Zombie, first of all, I want to start by saying that I actually like you. I’m glad you’re here. I think you’ve shown yourself to be a good poster and I always enjoy seeing your perspective and reading what you have to say.
However, this is the second time I’ve noticed you claiming that I have an “obsession” with a particular topic. The first time you did it, it was when I posted a series of questions (not one after an other, but over the course of a while) regarding people who fabricate or embellish their military service. I genuinely wanted to know about this issue, because it’s something that I unfortunately seem to encounter a lot. So I asked about it, knowing that, as usual, I would get many good and interesting answers from the various posters here.
OK. But I seem to recall you saying this:
I feel that the tone of this statement is unwarranted. I am not “obsessed” with finding phony war vets, as you implied; I was just posting about it because I had some questions.
Nor am I “obsessed” with Rhodesia. There was a thread about South Africa vs. Zimbabwe and I felt that the topic of Rhodesia was pertinent to the thread.
I expressed my opinion about Rhodesia. I realize that my opinion on Rhodesia is unpopular, and that is okay. I see where other people are coming from with their perspective on it, and I’m not trying to denigrate them or push my opinion on them. Even MrDibble, who obviously is as opposite from me as one can get on this issue, I respect, and think of him as a quality poster here.
My days of trying to push my opinion down others’ throats are over. I no longer have the attitude that I need to convince everyone else that I’m right and they’re wrong.
Really? Well, I’m a bit short of time. I’ll come back later and put some of his posts, if you want. But I’m not here to put **Argent Towers **muzzle in his poo. It’s not a true pitting, more of “what is it with you and Rhodesia???”.
PS:yeah, it’s Rhodesia, sorry for the typo. And, yes, if you search it on the wreck the dope calls a search engine, you will realize that almost all occurences of Rhodesia on the Dope come from Argent Towers.
Darn, a PM exchange, what a great concept for a forum. Why dont you send me a PM about it?
I thought I’d leave thread derail duty to the moronic, there’s always one around eager to take it on.
Wow, if you have totally failed to notice **Argent Towers’ **Reodeecya thing, I cant really help you. I’ll provide some posts a wee bit later. Frankly didnt realize they were necessary.
It is precisely this thing that interests me. Maybe you absolutely dont want to explain more of it, if you feel it’s just gonna end up in a flame war with nothing to gain nor learn for anybody. I just dont understand where it’s coming from. And it’s fucking puzzling me.
Rhodesia didnt come up only in the South Africa vs. Zimbabwe thread (if it had I would never had noticed it), it comes far far more frequently than that. I’m not demanding that you justify yourself, as I am in no position to demand anything like that, but just to explain yourself. Cause I’m curious.
I rarely venture into Great Debates. I find it hard to believe that in your time there you failed to notice that folks around these parts tend to ask for cites.
I’m not sure why you think a PM would be inappropriate for a personal inquiry that “is not meant to be a Pitting at all”.
I guess it is just a pet interest of mine, as someone who is always reading about history, and periodically something grabs me. The fact that there was once a functioning and prosperous nation where there today is so much violence and starvation is sort of poignant to me. I feel like there’s an attitude today that racial inequality is the absolute worst thing that can possibly exist and that absolutely any situation is preferable to it; I think the example of Rhodesia is a historical warning to people who think this way.
So, that’s where I’m coming from. I realize that people disagree, and I’m open to debating it civilly, but I have no intention of trying to “convert” people over to my side.
[POST=10020492]This thread[/POST] in particular highlights the interest and obsession, to the point of intentional obtuseness, of the poster in question and his opinion is that the solution of the future is to return to the past. And despite devoting most of what little time I allocate to reading this board recent, I distinctly recall Argent Towers bringing up the topic of false veterans (especially Special Forces types which are disproportionately represented by fakers) in a number of threads with the insistence (to the point of obsession) of unmasking fakes under the rationale that true veterans are men of sterling character who are irredeemably tarnished by pretenders.
Most posters of note have some kind of hobbyhorse issues, of course–my personal ones tend toward public key encryption, misuse of quantum mechanics in holistic pseudoscience, and statements that the Challenger shuttle “exploded”–but Argent Towers topics of concern seem incongruous insofar as he does not seem particularly knowledgeable or professional associated with either the military or international relations. As a poster, I like the guy (one of the few posters I recognize) and think him to be worth reading–better than par, and orders of magnitude above the Village Idiots–but on these issues he does read as particular.
Stranger, my friend, keep in mind that the post which you hold up as an example of my supposed Rhodesia obsession was posted three years ago. I no longer am any under illusions that the “strategy” I suggested (“re-colonize it with British people, call it Rhodesia again, and institute all of the same exact policies that Rhodeisa had in place.”) is anything but a completely absurd scenario.
I had a very different attitude three years ago than I do now.
As for the issue of the fake veterans, it is all about the fact that people were lying to me. I would never have made an issue of it before I actually noticed guys attempting to fool ME with their supposed military heroics.
Every thread I ever started about phony veterans was after someone tried to trick me. It’s not like I was sitting around thinking: “hmmm…what can I get all worked up about today? Oh, I know!”
Replace Rhodesia with Hogg and you might have had something with this thread, though I think the Hogg obsession died out a while ago too. I like AT though for the most part either way.
It’s not just Argent Towers. The idea that some nations shouldn’t be trusted to govern themselves, with the corollary that colonialism by European powers (especially Britain) was a great good for the world, is a pet issue of many posters here. And apparently by thinking either that there is no evidence that some nations are intrinsically better at governing themselves than others (I’m trying to avoid saying genetically “superior” or “inferior”), or that decolonization was a necessity from a democratic standpoint, we are being hopelessly “politically correct”.
Myself, I oppose neocolonialism for the simple reason that if we start putting nations into boxes labelled “can govern itself” and “cannot govern itself” based on not much more than our unfamiliarity with them, who’s to say where mine will end up?