Libs Claim Pres Bush Confessed To War Crimes

[Pagan]

First, here's the deal:

YOU go back through this thread. Find each time where you replied to me, and stated "So what you're saying is..." or "So what you mean is..." - and then fucking link to me where I stated the things that follow those phrases. As soon as you do so - I'll be more than happy to do the same for you.

Can't come up where I advocate torture can you?

Evade, sidestep, lie then evade again ... oh hum ............

[jimnyc]

Come on Slick, where that so called thread where I advocate Torture?

Damn dude, you're advocating torture by having people read your absolute stupidity in both this thread and the one where NT shredded you about the mercenaries. I know it's just 2 threads and you're too stupid to multitask, but it's still torture to those of us reading through your crap.

[jimnyc]

Can't come up where I advocate torture can you?

Evade, sidestep, lie then evade again ... oh hum ............

No need to, proved my point over and over.

[jimnyc]

Here you go, pagan, you wanted so desperately to know WHO was going to define WHO is a terrorist.

The dictionary! Merriam Webster is our new authority. No need to listen to Geneva or any other UN conventions!!!

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...1&t=1291146669

[jimnyc]

Dumbass is arguing with NT in another thread as to how a mercenary is qualified. NT provided classification and protocol from the geneva convention. Pagan used, um, the dictionary. And continues on that he is correct. Even states:

So you hold the Geneva Convention as the defining authority on Military terms and actions?

So I guess we shouldn't use them as any type of authority on terrorists or torture either.

[Pagan]

First, here's the deal:

YOU go back through this thread. Find each time where you replied to me, and stated "So what you're saying is..." or "So what you mean is..." - and then fucking link to me where I stated the things that follow those phrases. As soon as you do so - I'll be more than happy to do the same for you.

Evade, lie then evade again

Ho Hummmmmmmm

For the record my "so what you mean" was trying to clarify your position which you continually evade, maybe that's why there where question marks on them.

You know if you would provide a strait answer I wouldn't have to ask, by the way those "so what you're saying" and "so what you mean" I quoted your posts.

So come on slick stop playing games, provide the link where claim -

This is exactly why I don't answer in the manner you want me to, because you would rather play games with the words than actually discuss the issue. And here you are again with the "You're saying". I guess when you can't win you'll just make up a post and claim it's things I am saying.

I'm sure everyone reading this thread thought I was advocating torture against the "right wing extremists"! That's BS and you know it. You're playing semantics and word games and only looking like the ass you are.

Btw - why did you change YOUR stance? You once wrote that you were fine with them torturing based on RACE, and now you seem to be against it.

Hint, it doesn't exist.

[jimnyc]

Look, dumbass, YOU made statements that I DID NOT make by first stating "So what you're saying is..." - which is a shit tactic to use when debating, to just outright make something up that your opponent never said - even if you were "only to trying to clarify my position" which was total horseshit. I came back at you and did the same to you in return, but a little harsher. And it appears you don't like having words put in your mouth and now you want to make demands.

Tough shit. Debate honestly and don't do shit to other people that you don't want coming back to bite you in the ass.

Either way, thread has turned into a shitfest by the both of us and no use in leaving open. I'm not going to play "flame tag" with you.

[jimnyc]

Locked the thread but re-opened as some can likely have a good discussion in here. I'll no longer respond to Pagan to allow you guys to continue. I was going to separate all the shit posts and split to a new thread but it was just too much work.

[Kathianne]

it does happen, but not on daily basis as you think, its not a common thing to happen, because families which are willing to allow their kids to join the war are rare, but your logic to generalize that practice is what i am against, you cant deny that many palestinians are against that practice.

From your first link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_s...inian_conflict

This deliberate involvement of children in armed conflict has been condemned by international organisations and certain Palestinian groups.

Major Palestinian armed groups, including Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Islamic Jihad, and Hamas, have publicly disavowed the use of children in military operations, but those stated policies have not always been implemented. Some leaders, including representatives of Islamic Jihad and Hamas, have said that they consider children of 16 to be adults.

-----------------------------------------------------

so some of them consider 16 to be adult, while you consider 18 to be adult, then my question is, who can define who is and who isnt an adult ???, why should someone follow your own definition which is over 18, instead of their definition which is over 16 ?

i am not saying that i support those bombing, i dont support them even if the bomber is 30 or 40, i am just debating about the child using part which you stated.

i dont deny that some get used in the operations, but not very often, and not on daily basis, its rare to find a family that accepts to let her childs fight.

and instead of just saying that they are being used, you should ask, why and how can they convince teenagers to detonate themselfs, WHY would a teenager accept that ?

Again from the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_s...Indoctrination

According to emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of Virginia School of Medicine Vamik Volkan,

Most suicide bombers in the Middle East are chosen as teenagers, “educated,” and then sent off to perform their duty when they are in their late teens or early to mid-twenties. The "education" is most effective when religious elements of the large-group identity are provided as solutions for the personal sense of helplessness, shame, and humiliation. Replacing borrowed elements sanctioned by God for one’s internal world makes that person omnipotent and supports the individual’s narcissism. I found that there was little difficulty in finding young men interested in becoming suicide bombers in Gaza and the West Bank. Repeated actual and expected events humiliate youngsters and interfere with their adaptive identifications with their parents because their parents are humiliated as well.<SUP id=cite_ref-Volkan_7-0 class=reference></SUP>

Volkan gives the examples of beatings, torture, or the loss of a parent as typical humiliating events which might make a young person more susceptible to recruitment for suicide terrorism.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Abso, once again you first denied it happened, then move the goal post to 'it doesn't happen daily', as if I ever said such a thing.

The you quibble on definition of adult, ignoring the use of stroller bombs, but heh, what's the deal as long as not daily, right? Oh no, you condemn any, BUT then go onto ask me why? some would do this. That brings you back to education in the religion.

So? I guess I was right.

[abso]

Abso, once again you first denied it happened, then move the goal post to 'it doesn't happen daily', as if I ever said such a thing.

The you quibble on definition of adult, ignoring the use of stroller bombs, but heh, what's the deal as long as not daily, right? Oh no, you condemn any, BUT then go onto ask me why? some would do this. That brings you back to education in the religion.

So? I guess I was right.

i didnt deny that it happen, what i meant that its not a policy to make it happen, and discussing the adult age is the core of the subject, because if you see 16 as minor while they say its adult, what makes you right and them wrong, is it your law that should apply to them !!!

[Kathianne]

i didnt deny that it happen, what i meant that its not a policy to make it happen, and discussing the adult age is the core of the subject, because if you see 16 as minor while they say its adult, what makes you right and them wrong, is it your law that should apply to them !!!

Age isn't the issue. It's respecting the youth, not training them to be martyrs because they are young and impressionable. Actually it's just evidence of a people who value their medieval beliefs more than their future.

As you said at one point, doesn't matter if the bomber is 30 or 40, though you have more in the 20-30 category. It's the belief system that is warped.

[NightTrain]

Age isn't the issue. It's respecting the youth, not training them to be martyrs because they are young and impressionable. Actually it's just evidence of a people who value their medieval beliefs more than their future.

As you said at one point, doesn't matter if the bomber is 30 or 40, though you have more in the 20-30 category. It's the belief system that is warped.

Wow, very nicely said, young Kathi!

[abso]

Age isn't the issue. It's respecting the youth, not training them to be martyrs because they are young and impressionable. Actually it's just evidence of a people who value their medieval beliefs more than their future.

As you said at one point, doesn't matter if the bomber is 30 or 40, though you have more in the 20-30 category. It's the belief system that is warped.

i know that the belief system is stupid, and perverted in a stupid way, but that doesnt have anything with using minors in war, as they didnt use kids under 16 years old which is the adult age in their belief.

if the debate is about using minors, then i would say that they dont in their belief, just in your law not in theirs.

but if its about the moral gounds of using 16 - 20 years old in suicide bombings, i wouldnt agree with that, and i would denounce it.

[Kathianne]

i know that the belief system is stupid, and perverted in a stupid way, but that doesnt have anything with using minors in war, as they didnt use kids under 16 years old which is the adult age in their belief.

if the debate is about using minors, then i would say that they dont in their belief, just in your law not in theirs.

but if its about the moral gounds of using 16 - 20 years old in suicide bombings, i wouldnt agree with that, and i would denounce it.

If I take your teens and explain they have no hope in the future. That god wants them to save others in their country, but it's their personal lot to join god sooner, than later, as a martyr. Doesn't matter if the person is 15, 18, or 26 when activated, the abuse was done at their most impressionable:

Your quote:

According to emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of Virginia School of Medicine Vamik Volkan,

Most suicide bombers in the Middle East are chosen as teenagers, “educated,” and then sent off to perform their duty when they are in their late teens or early to mid-twenties. The "education" is most effective when religious elements of the large-group identity are provided as solutions for the personal sense of helplessness, shame, and humiliation. Replacing borrowed elements sanctioned by God for one’s internal world makes that person omnipotent and supports the individual’s narcissism. I found that there was little difficulty in finding young men interested in becoming suicide bombers in Gaza and the West Bank. Repeated actual and expected events humiliate youngsters and interfere with their adaptive identifications with their parents because their parents are humiliated as well.

While excuses made on basis of 'humiliation' the truth is still the truth. Abuse, systematized by leaders, be they religious, political, or social.

[abso]

If I take your teens and explain they have no hope in the future. That god wants them to save others in their country, but it's their personal lot to join god sooner, than later, as a martyr. Doesn't matter if the person is 15, 18, or 26 when activated, the abuse was done at their most impressionable:

Your quote:

While excuses made on basis of 'humiliation' the truth is still the truth. Abuse, systematized by leaders, be they religious, political, or social.

i agree with you, but my point still stands, that what you said have nothing to do with using minors, we are just talking about how to convert someone into a suicide bomber.

so i am not arguing at all that convincing teens is right, its wrong, but they are not minors or kids.