But why did you take it as directed at you? I’m not passing judgement on the remark one way or another. Full disclosure–I’ve been up for 24 hours or so and maybe I’m just not getting it. Is it that you were offended by the remark and that’s what made it personal?
I wasn’t aware we had the second coming of Eisenhower on the boards! So what number is too many? If it was 1,000 the world today wouldn’t even be recognizable.
God rest her soul, but I could Pit my own mother better than this lame thread.
It is not personal, of course, but I maintain that it is directed at all anti-Bush people, and therefore that it is directed at me as well, since I am anti-Bush.
Now that’s original! How didn’t I think of this first?
Well I gotta get on the what a lame-ass pitting this is train. xtisme, I’m sure there must be all sorts of shit we disagree about and if you’d like I’ll ream you out a new one first chance I get. Maybe you can blame this one on the host transition. I’ve seen some funky stuff on the board today.
That’s the spirit! Start your own damn pit thread if you think you’re too cool for mine.
I am about the most uncool dude you ever saw, and certainly not too cool for your thread. Sorry if it came out that way.
:dubious:
Did you just say that you’re not inclined to ask people to support their assertions, because they might turn out to be able to do so?
Interesting debate style you have, there.
:rolleyes:
I’d be honored to be pitted by you trandallt. 
And I can hardly wait for SimonX’s Grand Unified Pitting…I can’t wait to see what (if anything) he has to say about me. Usually my posts are so bland and non-controversial that no one would consider pitting me (except for my bad spelling, etc). Oh well…my first pitting and it just wasn’t everything I thought it would be. 
-XT
Ah, I missed this from Zoe. Might as well respond…maybe the thread will pick up. 
Well, could you amplify some? What did I thoughtlessly repeat that others have said? The bit about foul language and the lack of thought? That was certainly a paraphrase (though I can’t remember who I was quoting not…Franklin? Jefferson? Not sure). However it wasn’t thoughless…I was just trying to be cute and see if anyone could unravel the paraphrase and call me on it.
Or perhaps you are talking about the count down to 1000 lives? Again, I wasn’t thoughtlessly repeating someone elses words…this was my own take on whats been happening, based on several posts in various threads on this board and others, as well as references in several news articles I’ve read in the last few months.
Well of COURSE it is Zoe…I was trying to be funny. You get points though for catching this.
Well, I’m generally fairly careless of my words on the board…after all I dont get paid for this, its just for fun. I AM asserting that people have been breathlessly waiting…that was a deliberate use of the word on my part, not careless at all. However I think you are equating ‘breathless’ with ‘happy’. Not all things anticipated are ‘pleasurable’, and I certainly am not claiming that the majority of the people anticipating the 1000th death were happy about it…perhaps grim satisfaction would be as far as I’d go ( ). Seriously, I was not saying they were anticipating with ‘pleasurable expectation’, and if my use of ‘breathless’ is incorrect then I’ve learned something new about the english language today.
As to the qualifier, if the OP here would have ASKED me in the GD thread to clairify my meaning and provide some cites to back up my statement I would have been more than happy to oblige him/her. No one ELSE called me on my statement in there (at least, not as of last night), so I have to conclude that though my language may have been stilted, most generally got the gist of what I was getting at…or didn’t feel it was important enough to bother with calling me on it.
Well, I suppose in a twisted way you could say that me calling OTHERS on this is sort of a backhanded slam at a SUBSET of VARIOUS political parties. If you want to look sideways, close one eye and hop on one foot while doing it.
I seriously doubt this is representative of Democrats (if thats who you were getting at…unless you meant whatever party Nader is in now of course), and I never claimed it did. ‘People opposed to Bush’ does not equal ‘Democrat’. I was talking about INDIVIDUALS mostly…pundits on various news organs, posters on various boards. You seem to be trying to get me to paint with a broad brush by labling all (or even most) Democrats as counting down to 1000 for political reasons. Sorry, not going to happen.
-XT
Holy Mo-McFuckin Shit-Eating Christ!
I didn’t merely note the lameness.
I gave you an instruction.
Can I get a copy of that document? I think it would be a hoot to read, especially my own section thereof(I do have a section, don’t I? Please tell me I have a section!).
Enjoy,
Steven
Gee, Zoe, do you really believe that no one would be such a partisan ghoul as to wish for a high death count in Iraq?
I wish this were true. Sickeningly, it is not.
Not all the liberals are so. Some are.
Sorry for hijacking your Pitting, xtisme. It is pretty lame, which is my only excuse.
Regards,
Shodan
Shodan, Is that the best you can do? A locked thread from months ago in which the OP was universally condemned? And it is supposed to prove what? That some random poster was partisan enough to make outrageous statements? BFD.
Regards,
Binarydrone, who can see through your bullshit
Where in the world did you get that notion? What specifically did I say that led you to think that?
I object to xtisme’s implication that all anti-Bush people think that way.
If I say, “I think people whose user names start with an “x” are stupid,” xtisme would have every right to think that I was referring to him even though I didn’t say “I think all people whose user names start with an “x” are stupid.”
My statement that “Anyone who would use that 1,000th death for political reasons – for an opportunity to slam the other party – is disgusting and cold-blooded” is a non-partisan comment. Some want a high death count of insurgents. Some want a high death count of “coalition forces” immediately before various elections.
xtisme, I did elaborate on how you did not appear to be thinking about what you were writing. (Your contradictory statements about foul language, are an example.) The idea that foul language is the sign of a dull mind has been trotted out probably for centuries. But it makes no sense. (Some people also say that it is a sign of a poor vocabulary. That’s a bunch of rot too.)
Anyway, I’m glad to know that you don’t think that we all take pleasure in watching the number build up. Only a sick few of any party would. But certain numbers in your life will seem to be milestones – “round” birthdays for example – 30, 40, 50, 100. A double digit lead in the polls is consider significant. So is double digit inflation. Your 25th Anniversary. Some numbers are just naturally more noticeable.
Howyadoin,
Oh, but wait! That wasn’t the good thread… Here’s the Pit thread where some of the usual suspects treat Dinsdale like he’s Jonathan fucking Swift or something… They’re careful for the most part to disassociate themselves from the concept, but universal condemnation is not quite accurate…
Just a few quotes…
far_born
"What is this a patriotic message board? This is an international forum. Would your reaction be just as strong if he had wished for more French casualties for example?..I would view it as a momentary brain fart. "
Hajario
"I am not defending Dinsdale because I don’t agree with him but at least I understand the point he was making. *His point is that if the death rate of American soldiers goes up, enough of the populace will change their minds and Kerry will be elected President. * (Italics mine) If Kerry is elected president, he will pull out the troops and put more money into things like health care. The point is that there would be a few more deaths in 2004 but less total deaths by 2008.
I think that the premise is ridiculous and even if the premise were true, the end result would not be what Dinsdale imagines. If the logic of the argument were correct, and the conclusion came true, it would be a reasonable wish. (Ditto) It’s not all that different than what is being discussed in the GD about the Hamas founder’s assassination."
Left Hand of Dorkness
“However, in a time of war, people are going to die; unless we are to ban everyone except absolute pacifists, I think we must allow people to debate which deaths, if any, ultimately result in the most good.”
Truth Seeker
"Loath though I am to do so, I must defend Dinsdale’s OP on free speech grounds. He’s making a valid point, even if you disagree. A continued trickle of casualties may never make it onto the public radar whereas serious casualties will. There is no doubt that the extensive casualties in Vietnam had a huge impact on the American domestic political scene. There is no doubt that that the 200-odd marine casualties in Lebanon caused a U.S. pull-out. It’s reasonable to suspect the same claim might be true with respect to Iraq.
I, myself, have expressed the hope that Iraq would not go quite as smoothly as Afghanistan did because I am concerned that American policy makers might get the impression that American military was now so overwhelming that such adventures were risk-free. I read Dinsdale’s rather unfortunately-worded post as making a similar argument."
And so on and so on…
Sorry, maybe I’m just a dumb guinea from Revere, but would you like to discuss the subtleties of which deaths result in the most good with a serviceman’s mother? Or maybe express your hope that Iraq “wouldn’t go smoothly” so we wouldn’t get a superiority complex?
Oh, and here’s more from Dinsdale…
"It surprises me that my OP struck such a nerve. At best, all I did was question the merits of various casualty levels. Heck, there are threads all the time denying the existence of - and mocking - God/gods. These folk wish to deny millions of believers everlasting life! Where’s the outrage?!
I also find it interesting that the individual US soldier is granted such an untouchable position. Thanks. Higher than policemen, or just about any other career or profession - which have been regularly lampooned on these boards. Shed some light on the values of at least most folk on these boards. Interesting."
And let’s not forget this classic from Sailor…
“If an American and an Iraqi are fighting today in Iraq, I feel morally obligated to root for the Iraqi because I feel the American cause is immoral.”
Hey, maybe I’m just not open-minded enough to see this the way these folks see it. I’ll be spending the rest of the evening reading this, I guess.
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/modest.html
mmmm…baby…
-Rav
Thanks, The Raven.
Regards,
Shodan
You piece of shit. You dare to quote what I said as an example of my condemnation of him not being absolute? You asshole.
Here’s the complete post. I encourage people to read it and decide for themselves whether, when I say things like “I did not then and do not now think that calling for anyone’s death is either ethical or remotely relevant,” that doesn’t qualify as condemning the call for anyone’s death.
You may not understand the concept of defending a person’s right to free speech, but that doesn’t give you an excuse to bear false witness against me.
Daniel
Just a note: I make it very clear later in that same thread that I find what Dinsdale said reprehensible. My exact words to him?
So you can fuck yourself with your disingenuous quoting of me.
Daniel
Interesting. 'Cause personally, I’m sorry that some folks have actually been able to count to 1000. And those of us who are noting the deaths … doing so in numb horror and disbelief at the quantity of precious lives that have been cut short … are pained that they died due to POLITICAL motives.
That’s what I’m fucking sorry about.
But by all means, continue wagging your finger at those of us who are realistic enough to note that sadly, the press only pays attention when certain “round number” benchmarks are reached. And that many Americans seem to feel the impact of these losses only as they continue to escalate.
It’s a bitter truth about our ability to wrap our minds around the reality of war. So don’t blame the counters. Blame the people who took us to war unnecessarily and caused these tragic deaths.