EPT2008 US Presidential Election - Page 129
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
| ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 12:37 ahrara_ wrote: i would rather slam my face into a wall repeatedly or talk 9/11 conspiracies with travis than continue this discussion with you No one is forcing you to. | ||
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
| ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 12:31 ahrara_ wrote: Ya, you pretty much fail. Congratulations! You are ignorant, uninformed, and have no idea what you're talking about. I mean really, I wasn't looking for "the answer". I just wanted to see you demonstrate some clue of the complex dynamics involved in at least one of these issues. Here's the answer sheet, in brief (obviously debatable): 1.) Iraq must be achieve political unity. We do this by pressuring the Maliki government to allay its suspicions of the Sons of Iraq and allow their integration into the iraqi army. The Kurdish problem must be resolved. 2.) You could've said capital injections, full guarantees of bank deposits, rate cuts, ANYTHING that showed you had some clue about the economy. 3.) All you had to do was talk about NATO, or Georgia, or WTO accession, or its monopoly on the gas market. ANYTHING. JUST ANYTHING. 4.) What I wanna see from anybody is just an ability to back up their reasoning with anything besides just "I feel that way". You're saying it shouldn't be a right or at least a very good idea to guarantee even children have inexpensive access to medical care? I'm not saying I disagree with you, but you obviously have no clue how to resolve the ethical problems inherent in your beliefs. "1.) Iraq must be achieve political unity. We do this by pressuring the Maliki government to allay its suspicions of the Sons of Iraq and allow their integration into the iraqi army. The Kurdish problem must be resolved." Ok, so you just claimed that the solution to everything is that they achieve political unity. Wow. I bet no one has ever thought of that. Ya, all they have to do is be united. You said absolutely nothing about how to achieve any of that. "2.) You could've said capital injections, full guarantees of bank deposits, rate cuts, ANYTHING that showed you had some clue about the economy." I could have? I have been listening to Peter Schiff, the guy who predicted all this whilst being laughed at. He says to do nothing. You are agreeing with everyone who over and over again said that there was nothing wrong and now want to do something. "3.) All you had to do was talk about NATO, or Georgia, or WTO accession, or its monopoly on the gas market. ANYTHING. JUST ANYTHING." What? So you say that you just give them stuff and they will be nice back? Russia has nothing to fear from NATO, in fact, WE ASKED RUSSIA TO JOIN NATO YOU FUCKING MORON. "4.) What I wanna see from anybody is just an ability to back up their reasoning with anything besides just "I feel that way". You're saying it shouldn't be a right or at least a very good idea to guarantee even children have inexpensive access to medical care? I'm not saying I disagree with you, but you obviously have no clue how to resolve the ethical problems inherent in your beliefs." My point is that food and water isn't even a right. Its absurd to make the leap to medical care. | ||
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
| ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 12:53 ahrara_ wrote: I am in fact, now butting my head against the wall until it bleeds. Part of your answer to how to fix Iraq is: "The Kurdish problem must be resolved" Could you be any more vague? How is that an answer. Ridiculous. EDIT: "I am in fact, now butting my head against the wall until it bleeds." EDIT: You might as well. EDIT: You think that the point of arguing is to impress people with your knowledge. Completely wrong. | ||
|
._.
1133 Posts
He's a narcissist you see, all the people make fun of him, of his weight, appearance, and whinny little voice. He defends himself, claiming its perspective, no irrefutable proof, everyone else cannot prove his self identity wrong, and therefore for that infinite length of undetectability, he is right. He nitpicks every little sentence word by word, and when they're right, he just says "your an idiot, that's not how it goes." We showed him hand drawn drawings between what a normal high schooler looks like but he said wheres the source for that? who fucking drew it? I cannot hold it accountable. We get the kid who drew it, and he went about how his parents we're fucking morbidly obese, and he had no right to since he was being hypocritical. We use the concept of logical deduction, bringing up what is the average body mass index of the individual in America and what a healthy individual should be. We ask him to get on a scale and see for himself. He claims the scales fixed, the gym's one is from 1970s, holds a shitload of inaccuracy capable, and everyone's just out there to make fun of him. We find him stuffing himself with greasy cheeseburgers and soda one lunch time, we tell him that shit has an incredibly high caloric and fat content enough to throttle his luscious ass into a heart attack, but he doesn't believe it, you know why? Cause we're not completely 100% mother fucking sure that its bad for us, and we only heard that from other people from books and sources that could otherwise be from liberal biased media/economy advocates that hurt family owned conservative farming co-ops. Oh and you know what happened to him? He got his ass pummeled by an atheist, hispanic/black, football senior linebacker alongside his other racially diverse group of friends of differentiating sexual identity and tarred him to look like a oiled up elephant ready to burn in the sun. He got suspended, the fat bastard's parents called him out as emotionally fucked up and detrimental for the school environment, but through a school vote from the committee, the Spanish guy wasn't expelled but the other guy had to go. you know why? CAUSE THEY PROVED THAT HE WAS EMOTIONALLY DISABLED AND RETARDED. UTTERLY RETARDED. and suffered paranoiac delusions. I kid you not. Seriously. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
Hockey fans don't like Sarah Palin. | ||
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
On October 12 2008 12:56 evandi wrote: Part of your answer to how to fix Iraq is: "The Kurdish problem must be resolved" Could you be any more vague? How is that an answer. Ridiculous. EDIT: "I am in fact, now butting my head against the wall until it bleeds." EDIT: You might as well. EDIT: You think that the point of arguing is to impress people with your knowledge. Completely wrong. I really like when people try to talk about theory of argument with me. People should learn not to do that with competitive debaters. Argument is not making one or two sentence responses to everything I say with something along the lines of "but that's not neccessarily true." When you are confronted with evidence to the contrary, you have to explain how that's not true to be persuasive. Nothing except mathematical truth is absolutely guaranteed to be true. A baby could point out out potential flaws in an argument. It takes somebody who knows what they're talking about to couple that potential flaw (the claim) with reasoning and evidence (warrants). Responding to these kinds of posts is frustrating and pointless. It has nothing to do with "argumentation style" like travis wants to say. It is fucking ignorance to think that claims alone are argument. This is an universal, and apolitical truth. Accept it, get to know it, and use it. To be fair though, it would be hugely hypocritical for me to attack you for doing this while not mentioning that a lot of the liberal posters in this thread are equally if not more guilty of the same thing. | ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 13:10 ahrara_ wrote: I really like when people try to talk about theory of argument with me. People should learn not to do that with competitive debaters. Argument is not making one or two sentence responses to everything I say with something along the lines of "but that's not neccessarily true." When you are confronted with evidence to the contrary, you have to explain how that's not true to be persuasive. Nothing except mathematical truth is absolutely guaranteed to be true. A baby could point out out potential flaws in an argument. It takes somebody who knows what they're talking about to couple that potential flaw (the claim) with reasoning and evidence (warrants). Responding to these kinds of posts is frustrating and pointless. It has nothing to do with "argumentation style" like travis wants to say. It is fucking ignorance to think that claims alone are argument. This is an universal, and apolitical truth. Accept it, get to know it, and use it. To be fair though, it would be hugely hypocritical for me to attack you for doing this while not mentioning that a lot of the liberal posters in this thread are equally if not more guilty of the same thing. An argument can consist of any length of response. You are just trying to show that you know stuff. 1. I said no one knows, and that is my position. It is hard to prove that no one knows. I don't know, is my position, but I would be stupid to not also state that I think no one knows. You did something even worse. You think that this is just a game to impress people with your knowledge. What you uttered in your response is almost worthless. You do not know that everything will work well if the Sunni's are integrated with the Shia. There could eventually be a bloody purge. And "must resolve the Kurdish problem" is just an attempt by you to put out the fact that you are aware of the existance of the Kurds. Look, I could sit here all day and quote wikipedia if I wanted to. Comparing knowledge on the internet is a funny thing. | ||
|
XoXiDe
United States620 Posts
CLICK | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
On October 12 2008 13:23 evandi wrote:You are just trying to show that you know stuff. Look, I could sit here all day and quote wikipedia if I wanted to. Comparing knowledge on the internet is a funny thing. Lol, you guys really wasted your time arguing with this troll | ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 14:13 D10 wrote: Lol, you guys really wasted your time arguing with this troll Well, I assure you D10. America will not invade Brazil any time soon. Brazil is too tough. If you want, you can probably avoid this thread entirely! | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
On October 12 2008 14:28 evandi wrote: Well, I assure you D10. America will not invade Brazil any time soon. Brazil is too tough. If you want, you can probably avoid this thread entirely! Well if you commit to take care of Amazon, i wouldnt mind an invasion, our government is retarded in regards of taking care of the biggest forest remaining. | ||
|
Warrior Madness
Canada3791 Posts
On October 12 2008 13:10 ahrara_ wrote: I really like when people try to talk about theory of argument with me. People should learn not to do that with competitive debaters. Argument is not making one or two sentence responses to everything I say with something along the lines of "but that's not neccessarily true." When you are confronted with evidence to the contrary, you have to explain how that's not true to be persuasive. Nothing except mathematical truth is absolutely guaranteed to be true. A baby could point out out potential flaws in an argument. It takes somebody who knows what they're talking about to couple that potential flaw (the claim) with reasoning and evidence (warrants). Responding to these kinds of posts is frustrating and pointless. It has nothing to do with "argumentation style" like travis wants to say. It is fucking ignorance to think that claims alone are argument. This is an universal, and apolitical truth. Accept it, get to know it, and use it. To be fair though, it would be hugely hypocritical for me to attack you for doing this while not mentioning that a lot of the liberal posters in this thread are equally if not more guilty of the same thing. I love it when "competitive debaters" talk about the theory of arguments. Debaters should learn not do that with logic/philosophy students. Any "claim" can be an argument as long as it has a premise that supports the conclusion. What makes an argument different from an explanation, or a string of topically related sentences i.e. "Britney Spears is awesome because she shaved her head." is that the truth or falsity of the conclusion is unknown, and the premises are offered to PROVE the conclusion is true. Basically a passage is considered an argument if it implicitly claims "Q because of P". It's not an argument when we all know Q to be true and P just offers an explanation as to why it's true i.e. "Apples fall to the earth because of gravity." Just Sayin'.  Now, good arguments are a whole nother story. | ||
|
Locke.
Israel562 Posts
To some people it's blatantly clear (I would hope everyone) but others can't see that.. I honestly think if someone can't see something that obvious by himself nothing's gonna help. That's the problem with modern democracy it has no intelligence barrier.. And just to note I am not American and I am not even sure Obama getting elected is best for my country but Palin not being intelligent enough for this job is just plain obvious. Honestly evandi just agree to disagree with the others as this is getting to nowhere and derails this thread horribly... | ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 15:18 Locke. wrote: Let him think that Palin is intelligent, what do you care? To some people it's blatantly clear (I would hope everyone) but others can't see that.. I honestly think if someone can't see something that obvious by himself nothing's gonna help. That's the problem with modern democracy it has no intelligence barrier.. And just to note I am not American and I am not even sure Obama getting elected is best for my country but Palin not being intelligent enough for this job is just plain obvious. Honestly evandi just agree to disagree with the others as this is getting to nowhere and derails this thread horribly... I think it's pretty simple to show that Biden is dumber than Palin. That was my original point. Although I know that Palin is intelligent based on what she has accomplished and her ability to speak and perform in debates, all I was trying to show is that if you think Palin is dumb, you should think that Biden is dumber. If you want to think Bush is dumberer, you may. People are saying Palin is stupid a lot in this thread. Don't blame me for responding, some are arguing that its a reason to vote for Obama over McCain. | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
you arent winning, you arent proving anyone wrong, but yourself, everytime you claim something you just prove you arent worth wasting words with, if all of us werent so bored, and hadnt put so much effort in this thread already (and wasted our hopes that you would get banned) we wouldnt be here. Please, leave and let gay child killers rally for Obama alone. | ||
|
evandi
United States266 Posts
On October 12 2008 15:43 D10 wrote: The point is, if you honestly think that Palin is smarter than Biden, you need a effin reality check, no seriously, theres no going around that one with the usual blabber, generalization, deflecting, or making completely illogical claims like "if you think Palin is dumb, you should think that Biden is dumber" to get out of this one. you arent winning, you arent proving anyone wrong, but yourself, everytime you claim something you just prove you arent worth wasting words with, if all of us werent so bored, and hadnt put so much effort in this thread already (and wasted our hopes that you would get banned) we wouldnt be here. Please, leave and let gay child killers rally for Obama alone. I wrote a list, and you didn't respond as to why what Biden said was not stupid. I had a list of 12 things that Biden has said in response to 5 things that aRod thought were stupid about Palin. You're not making a point, your just stating an opinion. I'm giving some evidence, you're just wasting your time. | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
Face it, you are biased to the heart in every bit of this discussion, Biden is a intelligent accomplished man, hes known to make gaffs, and even so hes doing way better than her gaff wise, she has no substance, Biden could puke in courics face and that would have more content than Palin interviews. Previous interviews she did way better ? Well what the hell did she talked about ? religion and hunting ? show us those interviews Dont need to show anything about Biden, everyone knows him, his stands, his gaffs | ||
| ||
