[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by bamburg dunes:
Are you really blind? I got annoyed at you for telling me to not come back to the US, and some nonosense about besmirching my passport, or citizenship.

Also, you didn't clarify a thing, except to inject your thoughts into my words, while conveiently avoiding the rest of what I said, and also the little diatribe about my allegiance to the US. Get a grip on what you say in future. Don't worry, I certainly don't get into fit over a debate like this, but more about your dumb remarks which were just extraneous. I'll certainly tackle you on any mater, but leave out the ad hoom crap.

Once again, I am pi$$ed at you for that remark, amd that alone God, if you couldnt see that, then there is definintely something wrong.

No, no. You don't seem to be getting into a fit at all.

Btw, do you even know what an "ad hoom" is? Apparently not.

[bamburg dunes]

Oh, for the record, THEM merely references the opposing side of the insurgents, nothing more, nothing less. I'd have used it equally if it was from the US POV. But, I am approaching this with all things being equal, and like I said, you had to read into it something that wasn't there.

Sad.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
No, no. You don't seem to be getting into a fit at all.

Btw, do you even know what an "ad hoom" is? Apparently not.

Ah, more ad hom remarks, pity you don't know what it means. A fit? Nah, just dragging you up on one thing you said. The rest of your nonsenses has been dealt with, but the besmirching remarks makes me laugh.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by bamburg dunes:
Oh, for the record, THEM merely references the opposing side of the insurgents, nothing more, nothing less. I'd have used it equally if it was from the US POV. But, I am approaching this with all things being equal, and like I said, you had to read into it something that wasn't there.

Sad.

No, for the record them referred back to the noun you used earlier in the sentence, which was "so called enemy." You didn't use the word "insurgents" in the sentence, so them could not refer to it. At least, no reader could know you had that in mind because what you actually communicated is only what we can read on the screen.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by bamburg dunes:
Ah, more ad hom remarks, pity you don't know what it means. A fit? Nah, just dragging you up on one thing you said. The rest of your nonsenses has been dealt with, but the besmirching remarks makes me laugh.

Laughing at you (while reacting with a degree of shock at your amazing views) is not an ad hominem.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Can I help you apply for citizenship wherever you currently happen to be?

There's no way to weasel out of what you said and how you feel about America. Frankly, I'd be thrilled to help you avoid coming back to this miserable patch of Earth. Because I'm a man who cares.

You gotta be kidding me. I have stuck by my position all along. I am against the war, and I view American troops, and the insurgents as both equals in this, in terms of human rights.

As to citizenship, nah mate, I'm doing fine, least I get to visit outside the cave you seem to be in.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
No, for the record them referred back to the noun you used earlier in the sentence, which was "so called enemy." You didn't use the word "insurgents" in the sentence, so them could not refer to it. At least, no reader could know you had that in mind because what you actually communicated is only what we can read on the screen.

LOL, in your mind.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Laughing at you (while reacting with a degree of shock at your amazing views) is not an ad hominem.

Your interpretation of that is faulty. To take the discussion beyond what's being discussed, is certainly an ad hom remark. You can express shock, but to use the term 'besmirch' is an ad hom remark since it implies a negativity towads me beyond what was being discussed.

Deal with what you say.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by bamburg dunes:
Your interpretation of that is faulty. To take the discussion beyond what's being discussed, is certainly an ad hom remark. You can express shock, but to use the term 'besmirch' is an ad hom remark since it implies a negativity.

Deal with what you say.

An ad hominem is a fallacious argument. It is saying that someone's views are invalid because of some irrelevant factor. Link.

Example of Ad Hominem

Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."

What is not an ad hominem is coming to a negative conclusion about a person because of the position they take in an argument. I come to a very negative view of you because you seem to be upset that too few Americans are being killed in Falluja. You seem to be siding with and cheering on the enemy who are actively killing U.S. troops. I think that is a dispicable position to take, and I have every right to say so.

[bamburg dunes]

To clarify, once again, the so-called enemy, the insurgents, THEM; none of them are my enemies. So it's a bit hard to take in yur stance that they ARE my enemy, and this of MY United States.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
An ad hominem is a fallacious argument. It is saying that someone's views are invalid because of some irrelevant factor. Link.

Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad+hominem

Take your pic, dude. It means quite a number of things, depending on the circumstance. Your whole post was full of it.


I snipped the rest of your nonsense.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:

What is not an ad hominem is coming to a negative conclusion about a person because of the position they take in an argument. I come to a very negative view of you because you seem to be upset that too few Americans are being killed in Falluja. You seem to be siding with and cheering on the enemy who are actively killing U.S. troops. I think that is a dispicable position to take, and I have every right to say so.

See, you're doing it again. More ad hom crap, YOUR conclusions which you vocally expressed, even after I repeatedly told you otherwise, but you refused to comment on. You ARE questioning my motives, and thus building up your argument based on that faulty assumption. I wish no-one killed, and God knows how you read into my words that I wished US troops should be killed, is beyond me.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by bamburg dunes:
Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad+hominem

Take your pic, dude. It means quite a number of things, depending on the circumstance. Your whole post was full of it.


I snipped the rest of your nonsense.

Pick, you nonspelling idiot.

That's an ad hominem. A conclusion about you (which, remarkably, you have done nothing to even attempt to change), is not.

But I tell you what, we can compromise. I will place you on ignore, which will from my point of view vastly increase the quality of your communications. That way also you can enjoy spilling your bile to people with more patience for it that I have. Everyone will come out a winner.

Just like the Marines and Soldiers will be.

[Spliffdaddy]

^ trained to kill

*waves the crowd back*

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Pick, you nonspelling idiot.

That's an ad hominem. A conclusion about you (which, remarkably, you have done nothing to even attempt to change), is not.

But I tell you what, we can compromise. I will place you on ignore, which will from my point of view vastly increase the quality of your communications. That way also you can enjoy spilling your bile to people with more patience for it that I have. Everyone will come out a winner.

Just like the Marines and Soldiers will be.

Who are you calling an idiot? More insults. One Typo and you say this? Look, pal, I told you ages ago that i would ignore your drivel if you continued your nonsense with me.

You still don't understand what you did to be considered an ad hom attack, do you? It's not ultimately up to me to change your opinion of what I say, but for you to take in my replies then shut the hell up and apologise. You made numerous comments, ad hominem ones, about me based on your assumptions, that is what it is. God, you're really not too bright.

As to your ignore thing, LOL, it's what I basically said to you ages ago. To be on your ignore list would be an honor, just tells me who I am dealing with here.

Oh, reported once more for the insults.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
^ trained to kill

As are some of us here.

[Spliffdaddy]

Simey can kill a person in any of 17 different ways - all without leaving his computer.


I feel like I should remind you guys of that.

He's the person that trains the person that trains our armed forces how to kill.

He invented the whole 'trained to kill' thing, back in the 80's if I'm not mistaken.

Before that, we used to kick and slap our enemies on the battlefield. Like France does today.

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Simey can kill a person in any of 17 different ways - all without leaving his computer.


I feel like I should remind you guys of that.

He's the person that trains the person that trains our armed forces how to kill.

He invented the whole 'trained to kill' thing, back in the 80's if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah, a bit like playing soldier in the backgarden, only, you're more likely to get wounded pride than a wounded limb.

I'm sure that much of what he says here, he wouldn't dare have the balls to say in person to me.

[bamburg dunes]

The joys of being on ignore after someone throws a hissy fit. A bit like taking your football home from the game because someone called you a name.


Ok, back to Fallujah. I heard that people are crying out for medical help, and that supplies of most basic items have been virtually destroyed.

[Cody Dawg]

Now the Iraqi prime minister's family is kidnapped.

What the heck ARE they thinking? Why are they still in Iraq or at least someplace VERY protected?

Methinks they are not very forward-thinking?

[bamburg dunes]

It does seem a bit strange, especially considering that they would be natural targets for the insurgents.

[Cody Dawg]

Agreed!

I mean, one would *assume* that they would say, "Hmm, I bet my family is at risk. Perhaps I should move them someplace under heavy protection, even American protection."



?

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Agreed!

I mean, one would *assume* that they would say, "Hmm, I bet my family is at risk. Perhaps I should move them someplace under heavy protection, even American protection."



?

I'm surprised that they are even in the country. One angle on it could be to highlight to the Iraqi people that security is just around the corner, and to demonstrate this, here's my family, living in Baghdad. Or maybe they have always been there, yet why no beefed up security? Maybe they weren't considered targets since they aren't really immediate family members.

[Cody Dawg]

They aren't immediate family members? The media is portraying them as immediate family members, I thought.

If I had been a relative of the PM in Iraq I would have begged to go to Jordan or out of the country on permanent vacation.

You just know that when they capture you like that that you're dead.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
They aren't immediate family members? The media is portraying them as immediate family members, I thought.

If I had been a relative of the PM in Iraq I would have begged to go to Jordan or out of the country on permanent vacation.

You just know that when they capture you like that that you're dead.

Those kidnapped are Allawi's first cousin, the cousin's wife and their daughter-in-law.
Given that they were taken after a gun-battle I would assume that they were under some kind of protection - obviously not as strong as the protection Allawi is receiving.

Not a surprising development.

[typoon]

Iraqi troops have found "hostage slaughterhouses" in Fallujah where foreign captives were held and killed, the commander of Iraqi forces in the city said Wednesday.

Do those who think it was wrong to go into Fallujah still think it was wrong?

[Troll]

Originally posted by typoon:
Iraqi troops have found "hostage slaughterhouses" in Fallujah where foreign captives were held and killed, the commander of Iraqi forces in the city said Wednesday.

Do those who think it was wrong to go into Fallujah still think it was wrong?

We know that the Insurgents made up less than 1% of Falluja's population before this operation started. Was it wrong to use the machine of war on a city in which 1% of the population is committing crimes? Absolutely it is wrong.

Besides, this isn't a revalation. We knew the French journalists were being held in Falluja. They tried to get them out once and the US attacked the convoy. What difference does it make that you now know where they were killed? And even if they saved all of the hostages that are still held, would it be worth it considering the number of civilians killed? I don't think so. Yyou can kill a hostage anywhere. They could have killed Margaret Hassan in her office if they'd wanted to. It's not Falluja that's the problem. It's the anarchy that reigns across the country. You can pick up a hostage in broad daylight from virtually anywhere in Iraq.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by typoon:
Iraqi troops have found "hostage slaughterhouses" in Fallujah where foreign captives were held and killed, the commander of Iraqi forces in the city said Wednesday.

Do those who think it was wrong to go into Fallujah still think it was wrong?

The people believed responsible for the beheadings of foreign captives are Zarqawi and his group. The army officer in charge of the operation in Fallujah has said Zarqawi probably left before the assault began.

So why does the assault on Fallujah continue and what's to stop Zarqawi setting up new "hostage slaughterhouses" in other parts of Iraq?

[bamburg dunes]

Originally posted by typoon:
Iraqi troops have found "hostage slaughterhouses" in Fallujah where foreign captives were held and killed, the commander of Iraqi forces in the city said Wednesday.

Do those who think it was wrong to go into Fallujah still think it was wrong?

Yes, it was wrong, and I condemn it with the harshest of words. Troll's post nicely wrapped up my thoughts.

[BoomStick]

Too bad.

We went in and are stomping the crap out of those cockroaches.

[Vpro7]

Has anyone seen the horrific images of the invaders destroying the Mosques in Fallujah? Bloody terrible. I hope this finally unites the Muslim world into bloody well gettng together and taking matters into their own hands.

[BoomStick]

From what I saw, the insurgents were damaging them.

The Iraqui Natonal guard are the only ones allowed to enter and clean the cockroaches out of the mosques.

Blame your own kind for the damage.

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
From what I saw, the insurgents were damaging them.

The Iraqui Natonal guard are the only ones allowed to enter and clean the cockroaches out of the mosques.

Blame your own kind for the damage.

Yeah, that explains me just watching on tv, U.S. troops ordering air strikes onto a minaret that had a sniper on it. Then there's the dozens of other mosques that have said to have been destroyed.

Oh, I blame the U.S. for everything that is happening there. Hope they burn in hell.

[BoomStick]

If we wanted, falluja would look like Dresdin did.

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
If we wanted, falluja would look like Dresdin did.

It's ****ing worse than Dresden. I take exception to your comments too, that's my country, my people that you are bombing.

One day, we'll have the right to bomb the **** out of you, I can't wait.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
Too bad.

We went in and are stomping the crap out of those cockroaches.

Psst wrong forum, asshole. FubarForums is where you can spew your bullsh1t. Stay at home.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by Vpro7:
One day, we'll have the right to bomb the **** out of you...

We already have that right.

[BoomStick]

It's merely a firecracker compared to the nuclear hell we can release, but don't.

We don't want the massive death that y'all so earnestly lust for.

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
We already have that right.

You are very correct. I am just furious as of right now, if I was there, I'd pick up a gun and help defend Fallujah. Very trying times for Muslims today.

Talking of revenge attacks. I was thinking the other day. If the Taliban re-grouped and bombed the U.S. That would be ok under international law, isn't it? Since they were merely invaded because of refusing to hand over Osama bin Laden without proper evidence, which is what any country would do. So by all rights, The Taliban now have the right to bomb the U.S. since they were hit first.

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
It's merely a firecracker compared to the nuclear hell we can release, but don't.

We don't want the massive death that y'all so earnestly lust for.

Oh thank you so much for sparing us. We're really grateful and appreciative of this gesture.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by Vpro7:
You are very correct. I am just furious as of right now, if I was there, I'd pick up a gun and help defend Fallujah. Very trying times for Muslims today.

Indeed. And people wonder why so many Muslims become extremists. How is one supposed to feel when they see their Muslim brothers and sisters being blown to pieces, the justification being nothing but a complete lie?

It's infuriating.

Originally posted by Vpro7:
Talking of revenge attacks. I was thinking the other day. If the Taliban re-grouped and bombed the U.S. That would be ok under international law, isn't it? Since they were merely invaded because of refusing to hand over Osama bin Laden without proper evidence, which is what any country would do. So by all rights, The Taliban now have the right to bomb the U.S. since they were hit first.

Yup.

And don't feed the fascist troll, BoomStick. He's not a human being, he's a sick animal.

[BoomStick]

Says the one inciting genocide from the Religion of Peace�.

Your credability is now dissapated LBK.

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Indeed. And people wonder why so many Muslims become extremists. How is one supposed to feel when they see their Muslim brothers and sisters being blown to pieces, the justification being nothing but a complete lie?

It's infuriating.

It's breaking my heart. One thing some people don't understand, is the universal bond that Muslims have, across all nations and peoples, it's probably what scares the larger powers too.

You know, like most people, I can distinguish between what's generally right and wrong, but I have the utmost sympathy for anyone who goes to help our brothers and sisters.

Why should we stand back and just take the rhetoric being spewed out by certain foreign powers? We have a voice, a right to our own expression of opinions.

Yup.

And don't feed the fascist troll, BoomStick. He's not a human being, he's a sick animal.

Thanks for that. I take it you're Muslim too. Assalamu 'Alaikum.

[lil'babykitten]

Learn to spell, boomstick. At the very least.

[Joshua]

Illustrative little exchange.

[BoomStick]

Don't you have to go see haji or something like that to worship the Big Brick� idol then throw rocks at the Devil�.

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
Says the one inciting genocide from the Religion of Peace�.

Your credability is now dissapated LBK.

I couldn't resist this one. What do you think is happening to Iraqis right now? A picnic camp? How many deaths of people in the name of liberation does it take before it's classed as genocide?

Probably no figure for that, if it's the super powers doing the killing and invading.

I take it you don't agree with the notion of a country having the right to retaliate after being attacked?

[Vpro7]

Originally posted by Joshua:
Illustrative little exchange.

Isn't it.

[ThinkInsane]

This is gone on long enough. Some of you need to seek therapy. Take along hard look at yourselves. From what some of you are saying, it ain't too pretty. And that's both sides.