Adolf Hitler: even I believe invading Poland was right.

[Greebozz]

You may characterise it as such, but I rest easy knowing that any rational person reading it will see it as the reasoned (given your easily available posting history) precis that it is.

I think my previous posts have made a far better case than yours, I have acknowledged that there are two sides to every situation, you on the other hand seem to only put forward and the anti American anti British line.

I wasn't aware that arguing for an inclusion of all the facts of a case, rather than a partisan selection of the facts, was "supporting the opponents of...", probably because it isn't.

The above sentence make very little sense.

Who are "the terrorist [sic]" and how are they "winning"?.

You can't have it both ways, either the war in Afghanistan and Iraq is creating more terrorists, which I thought was the standard line, or we are winning the war on terrorism. Got you there I think.

Do you actually have a clue what you're talking about?
The most efficacious pre-WW2 "nationalist" movement in the middle east was Kurdish, and that was nothing much to write home about. To quantify Iranian nationalism of the same era as "dangerous" overstates the case by an order of magnitude.

According to you I am a bigger threat to the world and society with my apparent xenophobia, than the ultra nationalism of Iran and its sabre rattling leader.

Try studying history rather than believing newspaper editorials. Your arguments might then contain shreds of credibility.

My hobby reading history and military history. [/QUOTE]

As usual your presumption reveals you as what you are: Someone whose arguments consist of newspaper editorials and received "wisdom".

Others who can make a better argument than you? Bring them on, it'd be pleasant to debate someone whose arguments have more depth and meaning than your own rantings.

Perhaps you should think back to your own first "intelligent"contribution to this thread.?

Or perhaps they only exist in your head? Do they send you PMs telling you what a fine chap you are ?

One thing I would be interested to know, who is the historical figure you admire the most. Which historical person are your views similar to?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think my previous posts have made a far better case than yours, I have acknowledged that there are two sides to every situation, you on the other hand seem to only put forward and the anti American anti British line.

tell you what, if you're so certain, why not use the "search" function, cut and paste all our previous debates, and let people judge for themselves?
I'm confident that you be will revealed as misrepresenting me vis a vis "only putting forward the anti-american and anti-british line".

The above sentence make very little sense.

It makes perfect sense, but as your cognitive skills appear not to have improved over the last few months, I'll break it down into easily-digestible chunks for you.

You said "Its starting to feel slightly uncomfortable isn't it, supporting the opponents of America and Britain",
to which I replied "I wasn't aware that arguing for an inclusion of all the facts of a case, rather than a partisan selection of the facts, was "supporting the opponents of...", probably because it isn't."
In other words you claim I support the opponents of Britain and America, I state that making oneself and others aware of all the facts available rather than taking a decision to only select those facts that accord with your preconceived opinions (a vice you have displayed and have been pulled up for many times on this forum) does not constitute "support".
There, do you understand now, is that simple enough for you?

You can't have it both ways, either the war in Afghanistan and Iraq is creating more terrorists, which I thought was the standard line, or we are winning the war on terrorism. Got you there I think.

You haven't got me, you haven't even got an argument that couldn't be shredded by a ten year old.
you stated that I support the terrorists and that it looks like the terrorists are winning, did you not?
I asked what you meant by "the terrorists" and how they were "winning". If you believe that your anile point has "got" me, or that it even makes any sense in the context of the question I asked you, then you're a dolt.

According to you I am a bigger threat to the world and society with my apparent xenophobia, than the ultra nationalism of Iran and its sabre rattling leader.

Where have I said that?
That's right, I haven't, have I?
Yet again you're striking poses, mouthing talking points from the press that you don't appear to actually understand, and making yourself look stupid.
Well done, that man.

My hobby reading history and military history.

It's a shame that you don't appear to have drawn many lessons from your reading then, isn't it?
Let me guess, Andrew Roberts and Niall Ferguson are favourites, but you also like Richard Holmes and Anthony Beevor, and stuff like Frank Kitsons' military biography of Oliver Cromwell?
What about tactics, strategy, the psychology of military organisations, the economics of warfare?

One thing I would be interested to know, who is the historical figure you admire the most. Which historical person are your views similar to?

I admire Orde Wingate. he wasn't afraid to "think outside the box". As for my views, they're my own I can't think of any historical personality who'd have shared them, although I suspect that the mass of French revolutionaries, with their call for "liberty, equality, fraternity" had an outlook similar to the one I have.

 

[Greebozz]

ViolentPanda The problem I feel we have here is that there seems to be no way of knowing for certain which one of us is in tune with popular opinion.

Your are convinced you are right because of apparent support on this forum.

I would argue that your bed fellows, comprised of embittered anacists, Al qeada sympathisers and wannabe plastic terrorists(Aldebaran). I.e. young Muslims who get off the menace and bad boy image of the terrorists. Arseholes basically. And a rag tag selection of old Communists and militant Socialists, and conspiracy theory people.

 

[nino_savatte]

This bloke's a tool. "Binge thinker"? Talk about delusions of grandeur.

 

[ViolentPanda]

ViolentPanda The problem I feel we have here is that there seems to be no way of knowing for certain which one of us is in tune with popular opinion.

Your are convinced you are right because of apparent support on this forum.

No, I'm more certain of the accuracy of my contentions than of yours because:
a) I don't generalise as much as you.
b) I draw my conclusions only after examining a wide sample of data from both sides of the ideological divide,
and
c) I don't rely on the media for my information.

I would argue that your bed fellows, comprised of embittered anacists, Al qeada sympathisers and wannabe plastic terrorists(Aldebaran). I.e. young Muslims who get off the menace and bad boy image of the terrorists. Arseholes basically. And a rag tag selection of old Communists and militant Socialists, and conspiracy theory people.

So anyone whose opinions remotely intersect with mine are "bedfellows", are they? What simplistic nonsense. If that were the case then you'd be "bedfellows" with half of the British hard-right, and yet you don't see me jumping to call you such, do you?

I'd call you simplistic, but even that would overrate your reasoning ability.

 

[teqniq]

What's an anacist? Mr. Hister may be interested.

 

[Aldebaran]

I would argue that your bed fellows, comprised of embittered anacists, Al qeada sympathisers and wannabe plastic terrorists(Aldebaran). I.e. young Muslims who get off the menace and bad boy image of the terrorists.

Is this my bad reading of English or is this Greeboz calling me a terrorist or follower of terroristic doctrine... or something of the kind?
(By the way: What is "get off the menace and bad boy image of the terrorists" supposed to mean?)

salaam.

 

[nino_savatte]

Is this my bad reading of English or is this Greeboz calling me a terrorist or follower of terroristic doctrine... or something of the kind?
(By the way: What is "get off the menace and bad boy image of the terrorists" supposed to mean?)

salaam.

No, that's what he appears to be saying... in his own Manichaen way.

 

[Aldebaran]

mmm...

Thinking....

Call in the Moderator time?
Or shall I be a patient, forgiving terrorist?

Decisions, decisions... Always so difficult for my maniacal terroristic brain.

salaam.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Is this my bad reading of English or is this Greeboz calling me a terrorist or follower of terroristic doctrine... or something of the kind?

He's doing that and/or implicating you as an apologist.

(By the way: What is "get off the menace and bad boy image of the terrorists" supposed to mean?)

salaam.

He's saying you obtain excitement from relating yourself to the actions of and the imagery surrounding terrorism.

 

[ViolentPanda]

mmm...

Thinking....

Call in the Moderator time?
Or shall I be a patient, forgiving terrorist?

Decisions, decisions... Always so difficult for my maniacal terroristic brain.

salaam.

I don't take Greebozz very seriously.
He's shown through his sloganeering, his jingoism and his inability to think outside of his "comfort zone" (i.e. rightwing pro-state reactionary views) that he's not worth getting annoyed with.

In my opinion, obviously.

 

[Aldebaran]

Greebozz... Care to elaborate a bit on my terrorist carreer (when did I start, what did I achieve, how many killings did I make, how many recruits did I train, etc..)

I'm updating my diary, I'm a bit lost in such details and I have a deadline for publishing it on my Terrorist Website.
As you surely understand, this is a matter of urgency.
Thank you.

salaam.

 

[Spion]

I'm actually quite intrigued to know what you feel is so 'dangerous' about 'Iran's nationalism'?

Quite. If Iran had the economy and arms manufacturing capability of pre-war Germany, these clowns would have a point. But it doesn't. And they don't

 

[phildwyer]

Is this my bad reading of English or is this Greeboz calling me a terrorist

Quite the reverse. He called you "a wannabe plastic terrorist." If you want to be something, or are a "plastic" version of something, you are by definition not the thing itself. He has exonerated you of terrorism.

 

[Aldebaran]

Quite the reverse. He called you "a wannabe plastic terrorist." If you want to be something, or are a "plastic" version of something, you are by definition not the thing itself. He has exonerated you of terrorism.

I got that part, but I am free as a bird to deduce that since I am not a "wannabe" in any aspect of my existance, let alone a plastic one, terrorist is what he said I am. And in any case supportive of terrorism too (I ask you, who wouldn't be in my place. It is as normal for a Towel Head as breathing.)

There is also the second part... I'm now wondering when all that promised excitement shall start. Are there 72 virgins involved... so many questions... such incertitude... It is killing me slowly but steadily progressive.

salaam.

 

[Structaural]

What's going on this week? Are the Telegraph forums down or something?