Colonel Douglas Burpee - 23 Years Of Military Service - A Muslim

[jimnyc]

I didn't bail on the thread, I went out, (it was New Year's Eve)--and I don't think it is genocide-- I merely drew a conclusion from what you have touted as reason in this thread. You have pronounced several stages indicative of genocidal conditioning; including classification, dehumanization, polarization, extermination and now denial. Forgive me if I was pursuing this as a debate and failed to consider your emotional state. I can understand when someone develops these behaviors in the frontlines of warfare; its a classic survival technique. I've seen PTSD in most of my friends and family who have served in Iraq and other foreign wars. Maybe you were affected by 9/11, and developed these feelings as a result; but get some help, don't go around spouting hate and derogatory sentiment. If you don't overcome the hate and fear, you've allowed the terrorists to succeed.

So you inferred our troops committed mass genocide in Iraq because you didn't like what I posted? LOL what a fucking idiot

And you were pursuing this as a "debate", and a tactic of yours is to compare our soldiers to "Mao Tse-Tung"?

How about you stick with facts instead of dreaming up scenarios for your debates, dumbass?

[fj1200]

So you inferred our troops...

He inferred from your post that you were OK with genocide.

Are soldiers are trained to kill. So when those we are trying to protect attack our soldiers, they do what is natural, and kill the cockroaches.

This didn't help.

1,000,000 dead muslims

It appears my way is pretty damn successful. If they want to act like subhumans, they will be treated as such.

[jimnyc]

He inferred from your post that you were OK with genocide.



This didn't help.

Yes, people who cowardly attack our troops are cockroaches, IMO, and that's what we were discussing.

My other post was about the huge disparity in deaths, something like 1 million as per abso... And he stated he supported Iraqi's attacking us, even though I stated that the people they were attacking were there to HELP the average Iraqi, and only going after high value targets and those attacking them. My point was to show him that the way HE wants the "war" to go, is obviously not that successful, especially if you look at the numbers.

Now, if I state I condone our troops going after high value targets (terrorists), and killing anyone who tries to attack them, and that Iraqi's are killing one another (sectarian violence) - and add up all of them - and post the numbers as I stated...

HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT = ME INFERRING I AM "OK" WITH GENOCIDE?

Are you 2 really this obtuse, or just can't comprehend well?

[abso]

HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT = ME INFERRING I AM "OK" WITH GENOCIDE?

LOL what a fucking idiot

How about you stick with facts instead of dreaming up scenarios for your debates, dumbass?

To infer that the near million deaths in Iraq are a result of genocide is just being a troll and/or a retard.

So now you're saying our troops have committed genocide? You're just a fucking delusional asshole.

That's just fucking wrong, whether male or female. Maybe abso can show us where this applies to men equally...

Already did, dumbass

for me, i dont think that you are ok with genocide, but your real problem is in your lack of manners, sometimes you talk well, but most of the times you dont, that doesnt help at all in making it easier for everyone to understand each other, you get angry very easily, and then you talk with disrespect, which makes others angry at you, that result in a hopeless debate, nothing will be gained from the way you talk to others.

you are free to share your opinions with others, but i dont think that your freedom includes disrespecting them, or insulting them in any way, respect people even if they disagree with you, thats your problem, you are not capable of respecting anyone who have any other opinion than yours.

even if you think that the opinion of others is offending to what you believe and love, that doesnt mean you have to insult them, you often attack Islam and arabs and Egypt, all of that offends me, as much as it offend you that i support legal resistance against your country's army, but i never insulted you because you have opinion that i dont like, and the moment you do the same, you will make it easier for everyone to have a reasonable debate with you, i often get bored of any debate when you start disrespecting everyone in it.

i get it, you are a good man, but you lose your temper very easily, but thats not our problem, its yours, so please deal with it if you may, dont insult and disrespect people who disagree with you, try to deliver your opinion in a respectable manner and you will be surprised by the outcome.

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

about the debate going on, please refrain from directing comments about it towards me anymore for the time being, when i finish exams i will be back for debate, this is just a side comment which is irrelevant to the issue being discussed.

[jimnyc]

for me, i dont think that you are ok with genocide, but your real problem is in your lack of manners, sometimes you talk well, but most of the times you dont, that doesnt help at all in making it easier for everyone to understand each other, you get angry very easily, and then you talk with disrepsect, which makes others angry at you, that result in a hopeless debate, nothing will be gained from the way you talk to others.

From someone who's been discussing/arguing about this with me from the beginning, thank you for your acknowledgment that these 2 are full of shit.

As for my manners? Too fucking bad if people don't like me. And outside of my rudeness, I "talk well". I make my points known and I try to back them up with facts. But I will not "coddle" people. I'm not a troll as I don't go around everywhere like this, but if you looked around the board you would see that. When I'm passionate about something it is reflected in my keystrokes. Deal with it.

you are free to share your opinions with others, but i dont think that your freedom includes disrespecting them, or insulting them in any way, respect people even if they disagree with you, thats your problem, you are not capable of respecting anyone who have any other opinion than yours.

But my freedom does. Welcome to America, the Land of the Free!

even if you think that the opinion of others is offending to what you believe and love, that doesnt mean you have to insult them, you often attack Islam and arabs and Egypt, all of that offends me, as much as it offend you that i support legal resistance against your country's army, but i never insulted you because you have opinion that i dont like, and the moment you do the same, you will make it easier for everyone to have a reasonable debate with you, i often get bored of any debate when you start disrespecting everyone in it.

Then don't debate with me, it's that simple. And I don't attack those you describe without provocation and with a broad brush. Again, I try to even follow up my insults with proof. Don't hate me because Islam gives me so much to "pick on".

i get it, you are a good man, but you lose your temper very easily, but thats not our problem, its yours, so please deal with it if you may, dont insult and disrespect people who disagree with you, try to deliver your opinion in a respectable manner and you will be surprised by the outcome.

I debate people respectfully all the time, always have. At the same time, I'm not going to be someone else to please others. If I'm passionate about something, and "in real life" would yell or tell someone to go fuck themselves, I'm sure as shit gonna type it here. I'm sorry if so many Islam/Muslim subjects get me heated. But I defy you to find threads where I don't discuss facts as well and try to give proof with my discussions.

If you don't like my language or sarcasm when I get passionate, I suggest you put a kiddy filter on your computer and it will block out all these "insults" for you. Do a search for "Net Nanny" - their software will turn this board into an online version of "Romper Room" for you.

[fj1200]

Are you 2 really this obtuse, or just can't comprehend well?

Why is the problem with our comprehension when it can easily be with how you get your point across.

And regarding a post that you make;
You imply; I infer.

[jimnyc]

Why is the problem with our comprehension when it can easily be with how you get your point across.

And regarding a post that you make;
You imply; I infer.

Yep, obtuse is the answer. One can make both an inference and an implication in the same post.

And I'll get my point across again, maybe a different explanation...

Both of INFERRED that I supported genocide based on my posts. (to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inferred

Both of you implied that I supported genocide based on my posts. (involved, indicated, or suggested without being directly or explicitly stated; tacitly understood)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/implied

If you read the thread from the very beginning, and fully understood what abso and I were discussing, you would see I was simply referring to figures and never supported or stated I supported genocide. (
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genocide

Therefore I see both of your comments as knee jerk comments from idiots. (an utterly foolish or senseless person)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/idiot

[fj1200]

Yep, obtuse is the answer. One can make both an inference and an implication in the same post.

Not by the definitions you posted.

And I'll get my point across again, maybe a different explanation...

Both of INFERRED that I supported genocide based on my posts. (to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inferred

I didn't INFER any such thing but I can understand where it came from. The only evidence or premises we have are the words you post.

Both of you implied that I supported genocide based on my posts. (involved, indicated, or suggested without being directly or explicitly stated; tacitly understood)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/implied

I didn't IMPLY any such thing.

If you read the thread from the very beginning, and fully understood what abso and I were discussing, you would see I was simply referring to figures and never supported or stated I supported genocide. (
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genocide

I know the definition for genocide which is why I know that we are not engaging in genocide.

Therefore I see both of your comments as knee jerk comments from idiots. (an utterly foolish or senseless person)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/idiot

You want us to accept your definition and versions of posts, I am perfectly OK with restatements and clarifications BTW, but yet you refuse to let abso restate and/or clarify his words regarding US troops being attacked.

[jimnyc]

BTW, but yet you refuse to let abso restate and/or clarify his words regarding US troops being attacked.

Why, he's stated no less than 10x now that he supports are troops being attacked by what he calls "legal resistance". How many times do you need him to type it or me to repeat it?

And I think anyone who supports harm to our troops can go fuck themselves?

Do you see anything written above that is so terribly hard to understand? What is it you think I am missing, that a clarification would fix?

[fj1200]

Why, he's stated no less than 10x now that he supports are troops being attacked by what he calls "legal resistance". How many times do you need him to type it or me to repeat it?

Does a Minuteman fall under "legal resistance"? He's not an American, why would he have the same allegiance that an American would have. IIRC he has repeatedly offered support for US troops.

And I think anyone who supports harm to our troops can go fuck themselves?

I agree, shoot 'em up... the evil-doers that is.

Do you see anything written above that is so terribly hard to understand? What is it you think I am missing, that a clarification would fix?

He's defined "legal resistance" as he's using it and you refuse to accept it.

[jimnyc]

Does a Minuteman fall under "legal resistance"?

I agree, shoot 'em up... the evil-doers that is.

He's defined "legal resistance" as he's using it and you refuse to accept it.

WTF is there to accept? I don't support our troops being attacked BY ANYONE FOR ANY REASON. I don't care HOW he defines it, it's STILL supporting harm against our troops no matter what. Whether a legit army, "minuteman", terrorist or an average joe from the block - I don't support ANY of them attacking our troops, and I'll STILL send out a big FU to anyone who does.

What is so confusing to you guys about this? Do you think because abso is polite, or those "attacking" aren't "bad" people, that I should somehow understand him and his support for those attacking our troops? Sorry, not gonna happen.

[fj1200]

WTF is there to accept? I don't support our troops being attacked BY ANYONE FOR ANY REASON. I don't care HOW he defines it, it's STILL supporting harm against our troops no matter what. Whether a legit army, "minuteman", terrorist or an average joe from the block - I don't support ANY of them attacking our troops, and I'll STILL send out a big FU to anyone who does.

Did you see my edit? I probably should have specified a minuteman from the 1770s. And to stop any inference I don't support attacks on our troops either.

What is so confusing to you guys about this? Do you think because abso is polite, or those "attacking" aren't "bad" people, that I should somehow understand him and his support for those attacking our troops? Sorry, not gonna happen.

Why do you expect the same attitude from an Egyptian?

[jimnyc]

Why do you expect the same attitude from an Egyptian?

IN MY OPINION - an Egyptian would stand by an ally of their country. Abso is not supporting because of location but rather because it's fellow muslims.

But again, give me a list of 1 million reasons why he might support an attack against our troops - and 1 million times I will tell him to go fuck himself.

The 2 of you have managed to make it appear as if me not being happy about hearing ANYONE supporting attacks against our troops, is somehow wrong, that there can be ANY reason in where I can find that acceptable.

[logroller]

If we don't stay vigilant and remember, we become ostriches and won't see the enemy when they approach.

I have no intention of ever forgetting who attacked us on 9/11. This doesn't mean I hate Muslims .... it just means that I have a very strong and healthy distrust for them. Just like I have a healthy distrust of gang bangers. They may not all be murderers, but I don't trust any of them.

A gangbanger has engaged in a criminal enterprise; so I wouldn't invite them into my circle of trust either. Islam is a religion, not a criminal enterprise; so I see the comparison as false. However, I assume you do not trust the terrorists; why do you believe that their professed motive of religious Jihad is factual, and not merely an instrument of perversion? I don't trust anyone who behaves so abhorrently against the love that all religions profess as truth.

[abso]

A gangbanger has engaged in a criminal enterprise; so I wouldn't invite them into my circle of trust either. Islam is a religion, not a criminal enterprise; so I see the comparison as false. However, I assume you do not trust the terrorists; why do you believe that their professed motive of religious Jihad is factual, and not merely an instrument of perversion? I don't trust anyone who behaves so abhorrently against the love that all religions profess as truth.