@Kogan Lolokham:
I really don't like your way of argumentation, Kogan. Of course, you were kind enough to dismiss my previous remarks with a *cough*, so I gather you don't care.
I'm surprised nobody else is having a problem with that, though.
In case you actually just didn't understand what I was aiming at, let me recap what's the problem:
Let's see, you're making the argument personal by equating disagreements with the policies of US government with attacks on its citizens* and trying to evoke emotional responses by gratuitious use of empathic language(it's all about killing your children and hating on Americans), making direct personal attacks (your main opponent in this discussion is not having a clue, failing to understand, bitching about random crap, having nothing of value to add).
You seem to be intentionally trying to steer the discussion towards "us vs them" rethoric, as if the arguments presented could not be addressed without pinpointing their point of origin first.
You're making argumentative posts and then trying to dissuade counter-responses by making statements like this:
I really shouldn't simplify things. Leaving out the 17 additional pages that I made explaining things in great detail will come back to haunt me as people claim I didn't know about xxx, or didn't take into account yyy, or how zzz is proof that we didn't in fact get dragged in but were in it for ulterior motives. But I like the analogies, and they fit with my twisted humor, and this is all Horribly offtopic and feeding the trolls anyway. It's easier to hate Americans than actually find solutions to the problems we are failing to solve.
So whomever responds must be a troll or US-hater and any possible hole in your argumentation is there just because you held back some details.
You're claiming your point of view to be the only valid one, yet you do not provide sources to back it up. Furthermore, you're using blatantly false statements to support your stand, like this one for example:
We usually make up the majority of any UN peacekeeping force.
Which is off by an order of magnitude at best(~5% on a good month), and easy to invalidate:
http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/resources/statistics/contributors.shtmlSimilar with funding contributions:
http://www.unausa.org/Page.aspx?pid=847Your general attitude seems very inflamatory, as you do not allow any room for discussion, despite using myths and speculations as if they were "truths" and "facts".
Just to be clear, I'm not terribly happy with webber's attitude either, but it's much better in my opinion than yours, not to mention that there seems to be a host of people ready to criticise him anyway.
So yeah. I'm pretty sure this could be discussed in a more appropriate manner, if you'd be so kind.
*this is probably due to your perception of civic responsibility for everything the government does, which by the way seems like a gross oversimplification of how nations work. By this line of reasoning, Tutsi were responsible for their government's actions, that is their own genocide, because they failed to do anything about it. Same with German Jews, I suppose.