Do you Master Debate?
- Thread starter [Nook]
- Start date
- Status
.::PurpleLife::.
Senior Member
Nope. Unless you end up yelling in the end, then yes. xDDD
![[Nook]](/data/avatars/m/1/1990.jpg?1585850325){kind=avatar}
Still think that we should have just started the election over. I have to hand it to Obama, though. He covered his ass pretty well. If he dies, then we get Biden. If he dies, we get Pelosi. *shudders*Sporge27 said:Yes but that includes those not old enough to vote.... and convicts.... point is unlike Bush at least he actually had a majority of votesJeremy said:
Nook: I hate it when people say that. I've actually heard someone say they'd rather have the war here. If we didn't take it there, there'd be more losses here than there.
Except Iraq wasn't planning anything in the first place. Now that we came over there, there's even more attacks.Bacon Boy said:Still think that we should have just started the election over. I have to hand it to Obama, though. He covered his ass pretty well. If he dies, then we get Biden. If he dies, we get Pelosi. *shudders*Sporge27 said:Yes but that includes those not old enough to vote.... and convicts.... point is unlike Bush at least he actually had a majority of votesJeremy said:
Nook: I hate it when people say that. I've actually heard someone say they'd rather have the war here. If we didn't take it there, there'd be more losses here than there.
Ugh, I thought I was done hearing that backwards talking point years ago. Reading your political comments is like watching Fox News in 2004.Bacon Boy said:
I should first of all say that I support the intervention in Iraq, not on the criminal grounds that Bush used, though. Saddam Hussein was a genocidal dictator who killed thousands of his own Kurdish citizens. But Bush and his neo-conservative war-profiteer cronies more than botched the entire situation, they completely *censored.3.0*ed it up.
We lost nearly 3,000 people on 9/11. The Iraq War, which was started not as retaliation for 9/11 (as you seem to believe,) has claimed the lives of over 4,000 soldiers. Clearly we didn't send our troops to Iraq to prevent people from dying here, they seem to die just fine once we ship them overseas.
And of course, this is not considering the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, but why consider the brown people? That just makes it too complicated.
Thank you for taking the two sentences I said and completely blowing them out of proportion. And honestly, I'd rather have it no war, but you can't claim the fact that you'd rather have to war here and die rather than someone else, just as the Iraqis would rather have it here as well.Mino said:
People are saying that they'd rather have it here now because 1) They think and hope they'd never have to experience it 2) they're protected by their comfortable luxuries while the soldiers and Iraqis are living in hell.
And reading your comments is like watching CNN. Don't act like you're not biased and say that I'm in the wrong because I'm a bit conservative. You're biased towards the liberal side by the way your comments and rebuttals flow.
*And where the hell did I say that in this conversation? Show me, and I'll admit that I said it.
**Cool, the blame game. Back to what I said earlier, you're saying that because you're protected. Deny it if you want, but it's the truth. Right now, the chance of you being shot by a terrorist is slim. Opposed to in Iraq, it's a great chance.
I ignored your comment about someone saying "they'd rather have the war here," because it's meaningless and irrelevant. I've heard lots of people say lots of things, but I don't automatically assume what they say is a reflection of a larger public sentiment. What I was addressing was the notion that the Iraq war is being waged, and should be waged, because if we weren't fighting there then people would be dying by the thousand here. You never said that there was a 9/11-Iraq connection, but I said that you seemed to think that.Bacon Boy said:
Good attempt at coming back with the "CNN is the liberal Fox News" trope, but it's actually MSNBC that is the liberal mirror of Fox now. CNN is the plain insane one now, actually. But you wrongly believe that I watch CNN or MSNBC; I don't watch any cable news. Bringing up the issue of bias into this political discussion is pointless, since no one is making claims of objectivity. You can be certain that my political beliefs are not formed by the mass media, and you can be fairly certain that my political ideas are rarely represented in it.
I fail to see how the final statement of my original post constitutes a "blame game". I was merely remarking on how annoying I find it when the deaths of non-Americans are always significantly downplayed in any foreign policy discussion.
The Sign Painter
Senior Member
No, it is real massdebation.[Nook said:
Trent the Paladin
Retired Staff
Voting for him because he's black was shouted pretty loudly across local news stations. :LMino said:
I weep for the future sometimes.
Nah, it wasn't because it was black, it was because he was not the dinosaur and the bimbo. Or anything like Bush.Tom said:
I'm glad a fifteen-year-old weeps for the future, but perhaps you should see more of the world before you become world-weary.
Ron Ronaldo
Seer of Heart :33
I'm a terrible debater because I get all nervous and I can't think straight. D:
And then afterward I think of really good counterarguments and I'm like, oh.
And then afterward I think of really good counterarguments and I'm like, oh.
- Status
Similar threads
