> What I see is that you're not answering my questions or countering my points, just repeatedly resorting to these vague statements or concepts.
You're not making any points. You're just saying "we were right to attack because they are the bad guys- here is what makes them the bad guys". Those aren't points, that's not an argument, that's vilifying the other side to justify your own actions [Communism anyone? In case you didn't get it, that's what my picture was referencing, the connection between Communism and Terrorism as political tools]. But okay, let me elaborate on what I said and was ignored before- what the Iraqis did during the war bares no consequence on the validity of starting the war with Iraq whatsoever. What the Taliban did bares no consequence on the validity of starting the war with Iraq whatsoever. None. At all. Nada. Moving on.
> And "come back when you see things my way" is not the sign of an open mind.
So, "ability to avoid logical fallacies" equates "seeing things my way"? Well. Thanks?
> I've cited sources, facts, and answered every point and claim in turn. I have made my points logically and can back up everything I say.
Like how cutting people's heads after the war had already started justifies starting the war? But hey, no need to defend yourself, you already stated previously that appeal to emotion is apparently not a logical fallacy.
> I've proven I can change my mind and see the merits of other arguments... can you?
Now see, the problem is, I see and know what your argument is; or at least its basis. You're upset that people are attacking your nation, which has throughout its history done and helped many a nation, and you see this as just another extension of that effort, hampered by other nation's fear, or greed,or whatnot. Unfortunately, this also appears to blind you on the little issues like "the reasons the war was started for were false", "the administration was aware of how flimsy some of them were even while they stated they were hard facts", "we're not giving in to terrorists... by reducing our own civil rights", "the best way to fight terrorism is to say Fuck Off to your allies when they don't jump and bark when you ask them to", "we're being led against Islamic Extremists by a Christian Fundamentalist", "we support our troops by cutting their pensions and making them pay for their own health insurance" and a plethora of others that are Okay Because It's War. Or something.
Re: My Final Post. Really.
You're not making any points. You're just saying "we were right to attack because they are the bad guys- here is what makes them the bad guys". Those aren't points, that's not an argument, that's vilifying the other side to justify your own actions [Communism anyone? In case you didn't get it, that's what my picture was referencing, the connection between Communism and Terrorism as political tools].
But okay, let me elaborate on what I said and was ignored before- what the Iraqis did during the war bares no consequence on the validity of starting the war with Iraq whatsoever. What the Taliban did bares no consequence on the validity of starting the war with Iraq whatsoever. None. At all. Nada. Moving on.
> An appeal to emotion does not make it fallacy.
Alas, it does.
> And "come back when you see things my way" is not the sign of an open mind.
So, "ability to avoid logical fallacies" equates "seeing things my way"? Well. Thanks?
> I've cited sources, facts, and answered every point and claim in turn. I have made my points logically and can back up everything I say.
Like how cutting people's heads after the war had already started justifies starting the war? But hey, no need to defend yourself, you already stated previously that appeal to emotion is apparently not a logical fallacy.
> I've proven I can change my mind and see the merits of other arguments... can you?
Now see, the problem is, I see and know what your argument is; or at least its basis. You're upset that people are attacking your nation, which has throughout its history done and helped many a nation, and you see this as just another extension of that effort, hampered by other nation's fear, or greed,or whatnot.
Unfortunately, this also appears to blind you on the little issues like "the reasons the war was started for were false", "the administration was aware of how flimsy some of them were even while they stated they were hard facts", "we're not giving in to terrorists... by reducing our own civil rights", "the best way to fight terrorism is to say Fuck Off to your allies when they don't jump and bark when you ask them to", "we're being led against Islamic Extremists by a Christian Fundamentalist", "we support our troops by cutting their pensions and making them pay for their own health insurance" and a plethora of others that are Okay Because It's War. Or something.