Prove it!

Mr. A

[quote=mranonymous2u]

Prove it!

Mr. A

And that's why we have to be long winded. Because mental midgets like you who think in bumperstickerese will either, through arrogance or ignorance, misinterpret the slightest expectation of understanding. (You'll notice that I was able to follow your implication.)

I'm always willing to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt, but in these cases, I'm not sure which doubt is more probable.

Am I giving you the benefit of the doubt when I think you are trying your hardest but that you just don't have the mental horsepower to be able to follow a train of thought?

Am I giving you the benefit of the doubt by thinking that you are an obdurate prick who understands, but prefers to disinterpret with the intention of tangentializing the discussion away from his indefensible position?

There is the third choice, which is the combination of both. You deliberately disunderstand the question so that you can hide the fact that you are just too stupid to have a grown up conversation. But that's what I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt against.

You say that your statement (comparing the Iraq quagmire and the Marshall plan) stands. I say PROVE YOUR ASSERTION.

I doubt you can.

Mr. A

[quote=planrcoach]

Once again, I'll reiterate the complete lack of perspective that seems to permeate public opinion on Iraq. 

History will tell, for sure. In terms of how we make our living, a proactive policy and stable economic environment means the difference between eating beans or butter. No telling from this point in time who was "right". I saw Wall Street get bombed, and I see America saying, it's not okay to bomb Wall Street. If the implementation was poor, the learning will repay down the road. Bush ain't perfect. It's economics, and a lot of sacrifice by a few brave and willing Americans.

[/quote]

Then he should stop acting like he is and I might have some sympathy for his uncomfortable and humiliating position.

[quote=mranonymous2u]

And that's why we have to be long winded. Because mental midgets like you who think in bumperstickerese will either, through arrogance or ignorance, misinterpret the slightest expectation of understanding. (You'll notice that I was able to follow your implication.)

I'm always willing to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt, but in these cases, I'm not sure which doubt is more probable.

Am I giving you the benefit of the doubt when I think you are trying your hardest but that you just don't have the mental horsepower to be able to follow a train of thought?

Am I giving you the benefit of the doubt by thinking that you are an obdurate prick who understands, but prefers to disinterpret with the intention of tangentializing the discussion away from his indefensible position?

There is the third choice, which is the combination of both. You deliberately disunderstand the question so that you can hide the fact that you are just too stupid to have a grown up conversation. But that's what I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt against.

You say that your statement (comparing the Iraq quagmire and the Marshall plan) stands. I say PROVE YOUR ASSERTION.

I doubt you can.

Mr. A

[/quote]

I guess it's just you, me and bond guy fighting the good fight around here.  Thanks for your contributions. 

Interestingly, I read in the news today that in 'private meetings' before the war, top British officials secretly expressed they did not believe that Saddam was a threat....more evidence that strikes down the peanut galleries' claims that our allies though he was a threat.

Sorry...those who are drowning should ask for a lifesaver...not continue to pretend they are still sailing the ship.

[quote=Starka]The statement is valid and stands, your rambling PolySci 101 protestations

notwithstanding.



Why do you liberals think that inane, verbose commentary on unrelated

topics gives your position added credibility? [/quote]

[quote=mranonymous2u]

And that’s why we have to be long winded. Because mental midgets like

you who think in bumperstickerese will either, through arrogance or

ignorance, misinterpret the slightest expectation of understanding. (You’ll

notice that I was able to follow your implication.)

I’m always willing to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt, but in

these cases, I’m not sure which doubt is more probable.

Am I giving you the benefit of the doubt when I think you are trying

your hardest but that you just don’t have the mental horsepower to be

able to follow a train of thought?

Am I giving you the benefit of the doubt by thinking that you are an

obdurate prick who understands, but prefers to disinterpret with the

intention of tangentializing the discussion away from his indefensible

position?

There is the third choice, which is the combination of both. You

deliberately disunderstand the question so that you can hide the fact that

you are just too stupid to have a grown up conversation. But that’s what

I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt against.

You say that your statement (comparing the Iraq quagmire and the

Marshall plan) stands. I say PROVE YOUR ASSERTION.

I doubt you can.

Mr. A

OK, good one, 1 point for you. I bow to your skills as a master... well, you know.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Now, will you please try to back up your inane "micro thoughtoids" with some semblance of intellectual integrity, honesty or facility?

Let me give you a hint... Aside from the fact that the circumstances on the street are very different in Today's <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq and post WWII Europe. The sheer dollars that have been spent by the US thus far dwarf the expenditure for the Marshall Plan.

Further, the Marshall Plan did not remain at it's peak spending level for anything near 20-30 years (which would have taken us into the 1970's) as such your economic comparison is seriously, fatally flawed.

That ought to be enough for you to figure out how to proceed.

BTW, I truly enjoy conversations such as these. I don't expect either of us to arrive at the solution to the world's dilemmas. The conversation is a way for people of intellect (which I assume that you are, being in this most intellectual of professions) to plumb the depths of the thought process.

I'm more than happy to be friends of persons with alternate viewpoints (I rarely agree with people who espouse Liberal "viewpoints" unless and until ) once we have discovered that the person has arrived at those opinions due to honest thought.  Kneejerks from the left or the right are just as much a pain in the balls. (Not to be confused with "Some of my best friends are Conservative!" even though some are.)

Mr. A

When did I make any staement or statements regarding the economic

aspects of the Marshall Plan? All I said was that there was opposition to it in

it’s time after you claimed that the godhead of Harry Truman was all seeing

and all knowing, as opposed to the current administration. You seem to be

getting tangled up in your own strawman arguments, then replying with ad

hominem attacks.



As ever, the quintessential, obfusicating liberal. You people are so

predictable.

You seem to be getting tangled up in your own strawman arguments, then replying with ad hominem attacks.

As ever, the quintessential, obfusicating liberal. You people are so
predictable.

Mental and verbal diarrhea as always and completely unable to stay on topic.  It never fails that a debate with a liberal will spin out of control and devolve into them name calling and attempting to denigrate their opponent....calling me Honeybunch....lol.

Instead of actually debating the points, they throw everything against the wall to see if any of it will stick and throw up a smoke screen to cloud the fact that they have no grasp of reality.  Making up your own facts is not an approved debating form.

(Blood and Money - Newsweek via MSNBC.com)

More terrible news about the quagmire in Iraq…oops my bad.

Actually the economy is booming and the Iraqi people are optimistic about

their future. I wonder how Bush was able to take control of Newsweek

magazine and make them publish all of this propaganda.

How about that? 

Someone above said we should learn from history.  What was the long term economic result from Germany, Japan, and S. Korea?  All three of those economies were reduced to rubble with no oil revenue to contribute.  

Can we squeeze out a little optimism here? 

This will all settle out, but it will take time. 

The next comment I'm sure will be how the economic growth in Iraq is the result of corruption, that the poor aren't benefiting, the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, etc.  Spare us the diatribe.

[quote=Starka] [quote=mranonymous2u]

"... but give 20 or 30 years, Iraq will be a
stable democracy and perhaps our closest ally in the region."

At our rate of spending there, "we" won't be anyone's ally. "We" will be
living in a third world country in 20 or 30 years.

Mr. A 

[/quote]

Dissenters claimed the same thing about the Marshall Plan. They were
wrong then, just as you are wrong now.[/quote]

[quote=Starka]The object of the exercise is to rebuild Iraq. There's no other reason for us
to be there.

As to Marshall and Truman, they were both particularly vilified in their time.
(Truman, as you may recall, couldn't even get re-elected to his second term.)
The Truman cabinet had it's share of resignations and controversy.

This reminds me of the old joke:
Q: What's the difference between a politician and a statesman?

A: Statesmen are all dead.

What we need are more statesmen.[/quote]

[quote=Starka]
When did I make any staement or statements regarding the economic
aspects of the Marshall Plan? All I said was that there was opposition to it in
it's time after you claimed that the godhead of Harry Truman was all seeing
and all knowing, as opposed to the current administration. You seem to be
getting tangled up in your own strawman arguments, then replying with ad
hominem attacks.

As ever, the quintessential, obfusicating liberal. You people are so
predictable.[/quote]

Pardon me what? The initial claim was in regards to the economics of our involvement in Iraq. Perhaps if you stopped pretending to know what you are talking about, you'd remember which of your inanities you're avoiding backing up.

I never once mentioned Harry S Truman before you brought up the Marshall Plan. As such you could not have been responding to anything I had said about him.

Mr. A

[quote=babbling looney]

You seem to be getting tangled up in your own strawman arguments, then replying with ad hominem attacks.

As ever, the quintessential, obfusicating liberal. You people are so
predictable.

Mental and verbal diarrhea as always and completely unable to stay on topic.  It never fails that a debate with a liberal will spin out of control and devolve into them name calling and attempting to denigrate their opponent....calling me Honeybunch....lol.

Instead of actually debating the points, they throw everything against the wall to see if any of it will stick and throw up a smoke screen to cloud the fact that they have no grasp of reality.  Making up your own facts is not an approved debating form.

[/quote]

I'm sorry, sweetiepie, is there something in this rant that effectively challenges a single thing that I said to you?

No, there is not.

You are dismissed!

Mr. A

As to Ad Hominem, it's Ad H when I say "He's a fool because he's a Repugnican" Not when I say "You said this foolish thing that foolish thing the other foolish thing, you are foolish."

See the difference?

Mr. A

Incorrect on all points as usual, Mr A.



But then we’re all used to that by now.

Incorrect quotes.

LOL

Good one Starka!

OK, I'm going to be letting this one go too. There obviously isn't anyone here who has the ability to take the other side on this issue.

But thanks for playing.

Mr. A

[quote=Pandale]Can we squeeze out a little optimism here?  [/quote]

No, it doesn't fit the preconceived everything-they-do-is-rubbish-worse-president-ever-omg-I-tol d-you-so meme...<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[quote=mranonymous2u]

I'm sorry, sweetiepie, ...[/quote]

Yep....

What’s with this “sweetiepie” and “honeybunch” stuff.  Is there something going on here I’m not aware of?