What was that? "Assclown?" I love how Cyclowizard claims to use his vaunted "logic" and "reason" and then plonks a turd of a diversionary post in here. I tell you he's stinkin' up the place ... where in the hell is Cad to make sure he stays OT?!?
The fact that you have the critical thinking skills of a fetus makes me a troll? I may be a troll, but that's the worst reason for calling someone a troll I've ever heard.
Obviously, you're someone with little experience with 'facts', else you'd realize that this is propaganda (ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect). With no basis for comparison, the 'facts' presented are meaningless propaganda, as I've stated previously. Nor did I ever suggest that the stats in the US were comparable, just that it would give a frame of reference. Further, I daresay I have a lot more friends and family in Iraq than you'd care to count. But, of course, when you're wrong, ad hominems are always fun. :roll:
Propaganda to turn more people against the war. Providing any frame of reference would give the data meaning. Comparing it to pre-war Iraq would give an indication of progress made in either direction.
:roll: I already posted a pic. Smoke a cock.
Horsecrap! It's data plotted on a map. You just don't like what it's implying because you, like your idol Mr. Bush, apparently enjoy living in a fantasy world of spin where all of Iraq is a peaceful playground where everyone is happy and no one ever gets killed. Man, you need a serious dose of reality.
Nice. Is that another example of your "incredible knowledge?" Or how about your vaunted "logic and reason?"
It's simpleminded to think it's not propaganda. It's the definition of propaganda - look it up in your dictionary. You can spin it however you want? Then so can I.
If I get vacationed for that, then so be it. Your idiocy is astounding, and I've had a long day so I'm not exactly in the mood to be coddled by a troll. If I'm an old poster, prove it or kindly STFU. It was old 6 weeks ago when you first started. I thought posting the pic shut you up, but instead you're more petty than I thought. You'll bring it up at any time when someone disagrees with you. :roll: Go eat this
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
If I get vacationed for that, then so be it. Your idiocy is astounding, and I've had a long day so I'm not exactly in the mood to be coddled by a troll. If I'm an old poster, prove it or kindly STFU. It was old 6 weeks ago when you first started. I thought posting the pic shut you up, but instead you're more petty than I thought. You'll bring it up at any time when someone disagrees with you. :roll: Go eat this
Profanity is the last resort when logic and common language fail. Neither of these prevail upon you, so I have no other recourse. I honestly don't give a rat's whether or not you think I'm someone else. The fact that you use this statement in lieu of an argument, however, is indicative of your ability to argue your point logically. If you find yourself stuck, then you resort to 'oh, aren't you xxxxxxx old poster?' Childish, at best.
I was more interested in real debate when I got here - that's why I joined the forum. I always came here to check hot deals (never posted, just read). I moved, had a few free days on my hand, saw a politics forum and thought maybe I could get some rational discussions. As I've said, I'm pretty new to the whole idea of politics. My ideas have been tempered quite a bit in the short amount of time I've been here. Some have even changed completely when I hear arguments that are based soundly on logic that I've never heard before. Of course, all of this is cast aside and I'm decried as a 'Bush apologist,' which is a complete joke. I've stated many times that Bush is a joke and would readily vote against him if Kerry wasn't even worse according to my stance on the issues. I try to choose a side in any argument based on my own brand of logic, reason, and experience same as you do. Problem is, this forum has a heavy liberal slant, so the majority of errors against reason and fact are performed by liberals. Therefore, when I point them out, I'm a Bush apologist? Hardly.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Ah, two trolls all buddy-buddy. Makes me feel all warm and cozy inside. :roll:
This map has an obvious purpose: propaganda. Without any source of comparison, that's all it is. Are Iceland and Poland similar to Iraq? Doubt it. Do I have the capabilities of the NY Times to make such a map of other countries? No.
Since apparently the definition of the word propaganda has been forgotten, let me remind everyone:
Body counts of soldiers have automatic references. I know when I hear the body count, automatically I compare in my head to previous engagements. I'd imagine you do the same. The killing of hostages is done AS propaganda, so yes, I'd say it's propaganda. I'd prefer it didn't get coverage at all - I think that would make the problem go away. They do it to get attention, and it's working, so it perpetuates itself.
You're arguing in circles. All I've asked for is some reference data so we have something to compare this map with. Somehow, that makes me closed-minded and oblivious to reality?
There you go with the strawman again. Did I say the map was useless propaganda? No. Do I think it's propaganda? Yes. Why do I think as I do? Because of the presentation. I can pick any set of data out of a hat and present it to the public, who will be none-the-wiser. Presenting only one side of any story is propaganda. You can argue that the map was presented SOLELY for the purpose of pointing out the geographic diversity of the attacks, but I doubt you really believe that.
