When Is A Terrorist Not A Terrorist?

tiassa said:
My symapthies to the occupied counties; as an American I understand the need to expel the British.
Click to expand...

Do you not remember writing that tiassa? It was your first post on this thread.

Where have I said I agree with expelling the British? I haven't. I asked you how you were going to achieve this expulsion, and remove British people from British land, and where there were going to live, and what you were going to do with their property and livelyhoods, but you keep dodging that question.

tiassa said:
Do you not grasp that if Americans expelled the British according to your standard, there would be no America?
Click to expand...

Of course there would be an America. It would be a British colony still, unless Britain gave it self determination.

But let's get back to the core. this expulsion you propose, how are you going to achieve that?
 
StarOfEight said:
Vienna said:
As for Blair - he is Americas puppet just as every Prime minister before him. It has got to stop, we have more than repaid all the favours to America. And don't forget that America financed the terrorists in Ireland.QUOTE]

What about Churchill?
Click to expand...

Churchill didn't finance the terrorists in Ireland - Churchill was the leader of a coalition - As for America - phoey!

They rushed to our aid didn't they - 3 years late - Then you get the yankies saying "Hey, we won the war for you Brits, WE saved your sorry arses". Well, fuck 'em.

We owe America nothing - we have more than repaid the favours.

WW2 joke

"Son, can you tell the difference between an British tank and a German tank"
"No Sir!"
"Welcome to the United States Army"
Click to expand...
 
David F. said:
In WWII, we were 3 years late and the British are mad. In Iraq, we tried to be early and the British are mad. There's just no pleasing the British.



As an American, I actually agree with this British sentiment. The British owe the American's nothing -- and the American's owe the British nothing. We are even. I am willing to be friends but next time your arse is in a sling, don't call, we owe you nothing...

...but, if you do call, you know we will come, we always do.
Click to expand...

Hello David

Now you're one American I like :)

Our country is in a sling at the moment and there's nothing you can do to help, but thats another story!

As for Iraq we are mad at the British government telling the country that we are at war with Iraq - the majority of British people didn't want a war with Iraq
 
Phlog said:
Do you not remember writing that tiassa? It was your first post on this thread.
Click to expand...

Of course I do. But what's the relevance?

Where have I said I agree with expelling the British?
Click to expand...

Why do you ask? Seems to me you're shadow-boxing at best.

Of course there would be an America. It would be a British colony still, unless Britain gave it self determination.
Click to expand...

Okay, Phlog ... that one's just ridiculous. Go back, read through again, and try again if you like.

I mean, the only thing I can figure that would explain that answer is the idea that "expelling the British" from Ireland involves expelling everyone counted as a British citizen along with the government, while expelling the people from the thirteen colonies would have left the British administration intact.

At the outset, that would be applying two different standards with the effect of somehow justifying in your mind your continuing temper tantrum. Additionally, you seem to be incapable of understanding the sentences you cite.

You're upset, as I understand it, with my sympathy to the idea that a place invaded and held as a British colony would want to expel the colonial masters. While I can understand how a dense, semi-literate asshole looking for a fight might come to your original temper tantrum and obvious inability to understand the discussion you inserted yourself into, you are intent on the particular disrespect of trying to invent issues to demand answers to. For instance:

But let's get back to the core. this expulsion you propose, how are you going to achieve that?
Click to expand...

Where have I proposed this expulsion?

You have a number of things to answer for, Phlog. I think at this point it would serve your argumentative interest to let the rest of the world in on what the hell it is you think you're talking about.
 
phlogistician said:
Do you not grasp this! British people, in a part of Britain, want to stay British. Just because some Irish folks have a claim on the land dating back 1000 years, doesn't mean it is valid, or that the right thing to do is hand over sovereignty!
Click to expand...

By the same token then, England should belong to Germany and Denmark, as thats where the Angles and the Saxons came from originally. ;) America belongs righfullt to the "native American"; Australia to the Aborigines; New Zealand to the Maori and, strangely enough, South Africa belongs to the white settlers because nobody lived there at all when they moved in.
 
tiassa said:
Where have I proposed this expulsion?
Click to expand...

In your first post;

tiassa said:
My symapthies to the occupied counties; as an American I understand the need to expel the British.
Click to expand...

Do you not understand how this sentence reads?

The majority of the content of your posts are just ad-homs, you haven't demonstrated your grasp of the real political issues in NI at all. You seem incapable of explaining yourself, and pathetically attempt to pull some superiority angle, calling us illiterate, blah blah, but never actually getting to the core issues, you just dodge and weave.

Also of note, is that _nobody_ is supporting you in this thread.
 
Phlogistician said:
Do you not understand how this sentence reads?
Click to expand...

I do admit I don't necessarily understand how it reads to the imbecilic. That's why I'm so interested in your take.

However, you will have to make the argument about how you read it to construe a proposal of the expulsion of the British.

Learn to read, and you won't have these problems.

Also of note, is that _nobody_ is supporting you in this thread.
Click to expand...

And?

The majority of the content of your posts are just ad-homs
Click to expand...

Well, there's not much to respond to in your illiteracy. If you don't like the way I address you, you're welcome to cease going out of your way to be an idiot at any time.

you haven't demonstrated your grasp of the real political issues in NI at all
Click to expand...

You haven't demonstrated your grasp of reading skills.

Do you realize, Phlog, that you're hammering away on the "real political issues" in order to support an unwarranted temper tantrum by your fellow Brit which is spawned from his own insecurities, reading comprehension problems, and hatreds?

The majority of the content of your posts are distractions: straw men, ad-hom abusives, and general irrelevancies. Your attempt to use history to pick a fight only demonstrates that you have not been thinking or reading clearly this whole time.

I mean, here you are making all these wild accusations that you cannot support.

Learn to read, and then I might have some respect for the argument, "Do you not understand how this sentence reads?"

When you're capable of explaining how the sentence reads to you, give it a try. In the meantime, stop being so stupid as to base your argument in the notion that everyone reads and thinks like you.

I understand very well how the sentence reads. At present, your repeated demonstrations of your own illiteracy indicate that you do not.
 
I am not even going to bother reading the jibberish nonsense posted in replies. The question was simple, yet you people don't want the answer. 1st: Can I rephrase the question? When is an accused terrorist or believed to be terrorist a terrorist?

When someone murders civilians to gain a political agenda. (psst, look below)













The problem with that is outstanding in the sense that murder of innocent people goes back since the beginning of literature as a no-no. The fact that a political agenda is associated with it should stand out as...., to put it politely..., a special political system. Yeah, I didn't say retarded.
 
Surprise surprise, no new content from tiassa, just another ad-hom rant and self proclamation of superiority.

OK, let's dissect the sentence;

tiassa said:
My symapthies to the occupied counties; as an American I understand the need to expel the British.
Click to expand...

"My symapthies"(sic). People who align themselves to terror groups are often quoted as being 'sympathisers'. People with valid political points are not.

"to the occupied counties" There is no occupation. There are British people living in piece of land which comes under the British government. Only a person aligning themselves to some terrorist group working under a false and democratically unsupported view would term it an "occupation"

"As an American" Yes, we know all about NORAID, and even Giuliani sid some really stupid things about the Irish situation before terror came to his town, so it's known some Americans have a false impression of the situation.

"I understand the need to expel the British"

Need. There's an interesting word. Expel, another. You didn't say, "Need to find a way to live co-operatively and peacefully", or "Need to find a peaceful solution for full self determination of the Catholic Irish in Northern Ireland", or "work on a roadmap to democratic full Irish Union". Nope, you said 'expel', which is a forceful removal, which again, shows your sympathies with terror groups.

Do you now understand how your own sentence reads to someone who the IRA once tried to kill indiscriminitely?
 
StarOfEight said:
South Africa was empty? What? You have some sources, or something?
Click to expand...

Technically it was "empty" there were some nomadic tribes, but nothing was settled.
 
Vienna said:
Wow 10/10 correct - Europe IS a continent
Click to expand...

Quit playing at semantics. If you're going to complain about America's isolationism, what about Chamberlain's decision, along with France, to sacrifice Czechoslovakia to Hitler?
 
Red Devil said:
Technically it was "empty" there were some nomadic tribes, but nothing was settled.
Click to expand...

Well, okay, and technically a lot of North America was "empty," since the tribes who lived there were nomadic.
 
Phlog said:
Do you now understand how your own sentence reads to someone who the IRA once tried to kill indiscriminitely?
Click to expand...

You still didn't make the case for a proposal.

Think of it this way: Having been 13 at one time, I understand the need of boys and young men to fuck. My sympathies to all the young horndogs who want to fuck. But times have changed, and much of it seems to hinge on the idea that 1 in 4 women you know in your lifetime will be raped. That the extent of the tragedy is a sad blunder of ignorance is irrelevant.

Now then ... please demonstrate that I have proposed mass rape.
 
No thanks tiassa, I'd rather stick to the issue. Seems you can't stay on topic, and again, this another irrelevant diversion.

Answer the points in my post above, or don't bother. Just don't bring a straw man into play.
 
Answer the points in my post above, or don't bother.
Click to expand...

I did. If you can demonstrate that I have proposed mass rape, then you have made your other case for a proposal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top