To save my life I do not see a single place anywhere in which I have stated that sevastopol was being facetious, and that isn’t even operating under a strict interpretation (doing a search for facetious and seeing if my name opos up as the post author).
I am amused by the notion that, because everyone else in that thread failed to master the grand secret of your thread, that it is everyone else’s fault. Best of luck carrying that through.
I’m quite sorry; I have confused you with Diogenes the Cynic.
This thread was intended for me to vent my momentary and highly exaggerated anger at Sevastopol which has long since faded away; now it has turned into a discussion of my thread about “homophobes.” If you have something to say about that issue, you should revisit the thread. You still don’t get it.
Yes we do.
The problem is, we don’t get it the way YOU want us to.
OK, i will.
You’re advocating genocide, you sick fuck.
Happy now?
If they didn’t understand what you were trying to say, it’s because you made your argument about as clear as mud.
Remember, the common factor in all of your trainwreck threads is YOU.
Evidently I shall have highly estimable company in that regard. Still, though, I will try not to cry too hard tonight in bed, recounting the day’s activities.
No, no, don’t mind me. Some day - one day - a light of previously-unfathomable proportions will go off in my head and I shall - nay, I will understand your point!
Fear not, my lord. Together we shall prevail! Victory - over what? Only the future can know for sure - will be ours!
You can joke around all you want, but you’re still ignorant of my point.
Go back to that argument and tell me what you don’t understand; I’ll clear it up for you.
Based on the evidence you have presented, here, you are clearly promoting genocide.
That was easy.
Bomb Saudi Arabia? Who in Saudi Arabia? There are, indeed, forces in Saudi Arabia who support al Qaida. However, those forces are the people who, like Osama bin Laden, want the current Saudi regime overthrown and are mad at the U.S. for helping support it. So you want us to join forces with Osama bin Laden to destroy (si=ome unidentified portion of) Saudi Arabia simply because you do not have the capacity to distinguish individuals from the nations in which they live.
Bomb Iran because they “will surely use” nuclear bombs (that they have not yet developed? Why would they use them except in a defensive war. We still have enough nuclear capacity to destroy the former Soviet Union several dozens of times over. If Iran actually detonated a nuclear device on U.S. soil, they would risk being vaporized. The only point in Iran building a nuclear bomb is to have something to threaten the first troops over their border. Even if they suddenly were overcome with a desire for mass martyrdom, there is no way that they would attack the U.S., simply because they could not make a serious dent in our terrible lifestype or war-making capacity.
Destroy Hamas and Hezbollah? Possibly a path to pursue. Of course, Israel has been failing in that regard for a number of years and they tend to be better at that sort of thing than we are. I suppose we could join the likes of Milosevic and Hitler and Stalin and Pol Pot in a good round of ethnic cleansing, butr that does not seem to be a legitimate use of our power (and I would like to step back from being the bad guys, not embrace the concept).
It is sad enough that you are so irresponsibly hate filled. What is truly frightenting is that you seem to want to kill people in utter ignorance of the situation in which they and we find ourselves. You simply want to kill for the blood lust without making the minimum effort to know what you’re talking about.
Actually, I’m not. I’m sorry if you don’t understand the difference between the two. If you can explain to me how what I said is genocide, then do so.
Tomndebb, you haven’t identified anything I said as advocating genocide. You have identified it as military policy that you disagree with. That is all.
Maybe i’ll drop into that thread later and hand your ass to you, like so many others already have.
But i won’t bring the “homophobia” debate in here, because i think that this thread should remain devoted to demonstrating that you are both a hypocrite and a hateful, inhuman piece of scum who advocates genocide.
Fine. Keep trying; nobody’s done it yet.
Uh, you basically said you want to wipe out entire nations of people, just because they’re Arabs, or Islam-which, in that diseased, maggot-crawling miniscule organ of your’s that you call a brain, means they are terrorists.
If THAT ain’t genocide, what is? Hitler wanted to wipe out the Jews because he said they were evil and inferior.
Now, you’re saying that Arabs and Muslims are evil and inferior.
What makes YOU any different from those who advocated wiping out the Jews, you fuckwit?
You advocated massive and indiscriminate attacks on a people with the intention to destroy them. That is genocide. Period. Warfare, even “aggressive” warfare seeks to suppress an enemy’s ability to wage war. The concept of Total War that developed during WWII came about because we were roughly evenly matched against our opponents and needed to do more than merely eliminate their existing weapons, but also eliminate their capacity to continue the war. And even then we did not carry out your plans for the annihilation of whole nations or peoples. There is no people on Earth who currently constitute a genuine threat to the U.S. to the extent that the Axis of WWII threatened us. You are proposing swatting mosquitos with a sledgehammer (and are foolishly swinging at gnats instead of the mosquitos because you cannot even bother to learn the difference.)
You propose genocide and you are simply playing semantic games (for which you are remarkably ill-equipped) to rationalize your intent. And, as I already noted, you have not even bothered to make the effort to find out what you are talking about, seeking to destroy Saudi Arabia when neither the government nor the majority of its people pose a threat to us.
Buddy, you specifically said, “The Paul Fitzroy Solution: drop a nice neutron bomb on Iran, followed by one on Saudi Arabia.” As a neutron bomb is designed to kill vast numbers of people, please define how this is different than genocide.
Well, you were the first one to use the term genocide in this thread, and you asked us to decide whether your policy constituted “genocide, or…an extremely aggressive military policy.” Well, we’ve made our decision.
Given that you were the one who brought up the subject, and who claims to be the arbiter of what constitutes genocide, why don’t you explain to us why the systematic killing of massive civilian populations simply because of their religion and/or ethnicity and/or nationality should not be defined as genocide?
To tell you the truth, i’d be happy enough to give up the term “genocide,” and simply refer to you as a despicable advocate of mass murder. Wold that description sit better with you?
Simply amazing how you are able to refute the entirety of tom~'s post without actually commenting on the content.
At what point, since you seem to be succeeding as well here as in the other thread, does it become a question in your mind of “Am I surrounded by morons or do I need to work on my writing skills?”
Know what, Paul? Against all rational judgment, here’s a final bone for you: define genocide. Free (reasonable) pass: what is your view, in 100 words or less, of what constitutes genocide?
Neutron bombs don’t even really exist, do they? I thought they were purely theoretical.
What, managed to think the way you do? :eek:
We’re here to fight ignorance, not embrace it.
In Paul’s defense, I suspect that his writing skills are fine. I would guess that he is effectively communicating the actual thoughts (such as they are) passing through his head.
Of course, it does frighten me that he is allowed out in public without a monitor. What if he decides to actually act on his thoughts?