What is the point of these threads' existence? All of you are just going to end up tying Austrian Economics with kooky 9/11 red herrings. Bah! this is the typical idiotic drive of people to prove others wrong, when there is no net gain to be had (arguing for arguments sake).
Capital Pumper:What is the point of these threads' existence? All of you are just going to end up tying Austrian Economics with kooky 9/11 red herrings. Bah! this is the typical idiotic drive of people to prove others wrong, when there is no net gain to be had (arguing for arguments sake).
Too many Alex Jones true believers find LvMI through his support of Ron Paul. They think by not understanding physics, engineering and architecture they will be able to understand economics. The 911 Truther nonsense is a disgrace to the LvMI and Ron Paul.
"Anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints" - Ludwig von Mises
I'm referring to you too.
Poptech:No you didn't.
Yes I did. Go back and read my sources. I read yours.
Poptech:Were 500 WMDs found in Iraq or not?
"Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."
You know those aren't the WMDs that were the reason for the invasion.
Poptech:Were 2 tons of nuclear material removed from Iraq?
The material could have potentially been used to make a "radiological dispersal device" -- a so-called dirty bomb -- "or diverted to support a nuclear weapons program," the department said Tuesday.
Radiological sources for medical, agricultural or industrial purposes were not removed, the department said. Less-sensitive materials were repackaged and remained in Iraq.
The departments of Energy and Defense removed "1.77 metric tons of low-enriched uranium and roughly 1,000 highly radioactive sources from the former Iraq nuclear research facility," Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said Tuesday.
Low enriched uranium is not weapons grade. 1,000 radioactive sources could have been microwaves.
Seriously, am I the conspiracy theorist or are you the conspiracy theorist?
Poptech:Please define neo-con because you don't even understand the definition of the word as you continue to misuse it as if you don't own a dictionary.
There used to be a good description on Wikipedia. I haven't looked in a couple years, since I spend most of my time on LvMI, I don't expect to debate with neocons.
But you're an ideological neocon. A Straussian. You might not have once been a leftist, turned to the right like David Horowitz or Ronald Reagan, but you defend the American system (in the Hamiltonian sense).
Poptech:The ignorance here at Mises of what a neo-con is simply amazing.
Perhaps because we're libertarians.
Poptech:So please explain why I was banned for not supporting actual neo-con positions.
I don't know. I saw you weren't very popular on hot air. Maybe it's just your personality and debate style.
Capital Pumper:All of you are just going to end up tying Austrian Economics with kooky 9/11 red herrings.
Well, Rothbard was tied up with that kooky conspiracy theory about the FED and bankers, but yeah, I think you have a point.
SilentXtarian:Hitler was a conspiracy theorist
And he was correct, there was a conspiracy. Banking families.
liberty student:Yes I did. Go back and read my sources. I read yours.
I did, they do not debunk that over 500 WMDs were found in Iraq and almost 2 tons of enriched uranium.
liberty student:You know those aren't the WMDs that were the reason for the invasion.
No one of the reasons for the invasion (not that I am supporting it) was that Iraq had WMDs, they clearly did and you just contradicted yourself as you now admit this. Making your original statement about them not having any, false.
liberty student:Low enriched uranium is not weapons grade
Can low enriched uranium be used for a dirty bomb?
liberty student:Seriously, am I the conspiracy theorist or are you the conspiracy theorist?
I stated no conspiracy, just the facts of what was actually found despite your propaganda.
liberty student:But you're an ideological neocon. A Straussian. You might not have once been a leftist, turned to the right like David Horowitz or Ronald Reagan, but you defend the American system (in the Hamiltonian sense).
Really? Please define neo-con. You seem unable to do this elementary task. Where have I supported Alexander Hamilton? Since you are absolutely clueless, I will explain for you. I have always been a fiscal conservative (essentially libertarian) only caring about economic policy (abolishing the welfare state, repealing regulations and taxes ect...) but after dealing with too many Neo-Conservatives and Social Conservatives to more clearly separate myself I define myself more accurately as a limited-government libertarian now.
liberty student:Perhaps because we're libertarians.
This is the same problem I ran into with Conservatives, there were three major ideological conservatives - Fiscal Conservatives, Neo-Conservatives and Social Conservatives. There are clearly at least two libertarian ideologies - Anarcho-capitalists (Rothbard) and Minarchists (Mises, Hayek, Friedman). Pretending there is only one and the other does not exist is nonsense
liberty student:I don't know. I saw you weren't very popular on hot air. Maybe it's just your personality and debate style.
No it was because I would not stop exposing John McCain, Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin's big government neo-con ideologies.
Poptech:There are clearly at least two libertarian ideologies - Anarcho-capitalists (Rothbard) and Minarchists (Mises, Hayek, Friedman). Pretending there is only one and the other does not exist is nonsense
Anarcho-capitalism is a form of private-property anarchism, its not necessarily libertarian. Its merely a description of institutions, not results.
Poptech: I have always been a fiscal conservative (essentially libertarian) only caring about economic policy (abolishing the welfare state, repealing regulations and taxes ect...) but after dealing with too many Neo-Conservatives and Social Conservatives to more clearly separate myself I define myself more accurately as a limited-government libertarian now.
Libertarianism has nothing to do with financial conservatism or minarchism. Libertarianism is about the non-aggression principle. It says nothing about whether or not one should spend money loosely or hoard it tightly. It says nothing about what should or should not be purchased.
The NAP taken to its logical extreme, is roughly equivalent to anarchism. (None should compel another with the initiation of force)
Poptech: liberty student:I don't know. I saw you weren't very popular on hot air. Maybe it's just your personality and debate style. No it was because I would not stop exposing John McCain, Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin's big government neo-con ideologies.
You have a forum, so you will understand this. On someone elses site, you have no right to advertise links in your signature, or to make statements the site owners do not want to publish. That's libertarianism 101. Private property.
Poptech:Please define neo-con.
Your sticky on your forum about justifications for the Iraq war. That's American imperialism, which is synonymous with neo-conservatism. No small government conservative with any sincerity would post something like that. Even your attempts to validate the invasion here, or to make a claim about 500 decades old WMDs is pretty pathetic. It might be conservative to support the war party (I know, you voted for Perot and Barr), but it's not a libertarian analysis of that war.
liberty student:Libertarianism has nothing to do with financial conservatism or minarchism. Libertarianism is about the non-aggression principle. It says nothing about whether or not one should spend money loosely or hoard it tightly. It says nothing about what should or should not be purchased.
It has to do with both financial conservatives and minarchists. Financial conservatives want to reduce government spending, repeal the welfare state and remove regulations and taxes. Minarchists want the same.
Libertarianism (defined) - "One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state."
liberty student:You have a forum, so you will understand this.
I understand you support regulations and censorship so long as your control it. Which is hypocritical.
liberty student:...about justifications for the Iraq war. That's American imperialism, which is synonymous with neo-conservatism. No small government conservative with any sincerity would post something like that. Even your attempts to validate the invasion here, or to make a claim about 500 decades old WMDs is pretty pathetic. It might be conservative to support the war party (I know, you voted for Perot and Barr), but it's not a libertarian analysis of that war.
The facts don't change whether you support the war or not. Lying about why Iraq was invaded does not help your case. Anyone who is honest about seeking the truth would not make things up to further their ideological agenda. American imperialism would be about conquering and then keeping foreign property none of this is happening. Neo-conservatives are about nation building and spreading democracy through the use of force, I am not. You keep throwing around words you don't understand the definitions of. I made no attempts to validate the invasion as I have not defended it here but the reality is that over 500 WMDs and almost 2 tons of enriched-uranium were found in Iraq, that is an indisputable fact. I have for sometime called for the US to remove all troops from all bases not on American soil (Germany and South Korea ect...) and we should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. The war party? I am assuming you are refering to the Democrats; Wilson (Democrat) - WWI, FDR (Democrat) - WWII, Truman (Democrat) - Korea, Kennedy (Democrat) + Johnson (Democrat) - Vietnam.
The war party? I am assuming you are refering to the Democrats; Wilson (Democrat) - WWI, FDR (Democrat) - WWII, Truman (Democrat) - Korea, Kennedy (Democrat) + Johnson (Democrat) - Vietnam.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Poptech: I understand you support regulations and censorship so long as your control it. Which is hypocritical.
I've said this to you before and I say it again. You're support of government and none-understanding of property rights probably go hand and hand. For government and property rights absolutely do not go hand and hand (harmonize).
Poptech:It has to do with both financial conservatives and minarchists. Financial conservatives want to reduce government spending, repeal the welfare state and remove regulations and taxes. Minarchists want the same.
I heard a really good argument against minarchism by Walter Block a few days ago. Minarchists [ such as yourself ] conclude that anarchy is utopian or unworkable and that there needs to be a mediator such as government in place in order to settle disputes and enforce law. This cannot be done by private corporations or trusts. Yet the world [ in terms of nations ] is in a state of anarchy. Therefore logically speaking, you would have to support world government and if you don't, justify why governments [ who last century killed millions of people ] can sustain themselves in such anarchy yet the individuals of the world cannot.
Poptech:I understand you support regulations and censorship so long as your control it. Which is hypocritical.
So now you are saying property owners can't utilize regulations or censorship on their own property? Strange.
Poptech:American imperialism would be about conquering and then keeping foreign property none of this is happening.
Well see we have this new crazzzzy theory called neocolonialism. Get this, we can invade and conquer a country then establish a puppet government that does our bidding without even having to leave a substancial military force behind. Pretty wacky isn't it?
Poptech:I made no attempts to validate the invasion as I have not defended it here but the reality is that over 500 WMDs and almost 2 tons of enriched-uranium were found in Iraq, that is an indisputable fact.
10 year old mustard gas that was buried and low-enriched uranium [ that can't even make a nuclear bomb ] is really worth thousands of lives.
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Laughing Man: Well see we have this new crazzzzy theory called neocolonialism. Get this, we can invade and conquer a country then establish a puppet government that does our bidding without even having to leave a substancial military force behind. Pretty wacky isn't it?
I don't doubt that's the U.S.'s effort in Somalia now that the U.S. troops are there.
wilderness:I don't doubt that's the U.S.'s effort in Somalia now that the U.S. troops are there.
The Welfare-Warfare State strikes again!
by the way, the guy they killed never even attacked the United States
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g7OaI4_kjeHA-o4UhlmP7vlWmrrwD9AO0IS84
Poptech:Libertarianism (defined) - "One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state."
At LvMI, and particularly in this community, we refer to the Austrian school for definitions, not Yahoo.
http://mises.org/story/3660
Rothbard via Kinsella
The libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else. This may be called the "nonaggression axiom." "Aggression" is defined as the initiation of the use or threat of physical violence against the person or property of anyone else. Aggression is therefore synonymous with invasion.
You are not a libertarian. (see below)
Wrong. I support it on my property, and I support your regulations and censorship on your property. Read the article by Kinsella I linked above.
You aren't even a conservative if you don't understand private property. You might as well be a progressive liberal.
Poptech:The facts don't change whether you support the war or not.
Indeed. Foreign war is aggression.
Poptech:Lying about why Iraq was invaded does not help your case.
I'm not lying. Tony Blair has admitted they didn't find WMDs. The CIA has documented that they did not find the WMDs they used as an excuse to invade. Colin Powell has admitted that they didn't find WMDs. All under duress, with no political upside to doing so. 20 year old depleted uranium and degraded sarin gas were not the impetus for war.
Oh really? Americans are coming home from Germany, Japan and Korea? American troops are leaving Iraq with the billion dollar embassy bigger than the Vatican? Who are you kidding? If building temples in other countries, and 50 year occupations isn't proof enough of an empire, I don't know what you think is. Again, you are proposing views no libertarian in good conscience, at least as far as I have seen in the austro-libertarian orbit would endorse.
Poptech:Neo-conservatives are about nation building and spreading democracy through the use of force, I am not.
No, those are neo-liberals. Progressive liberals.
You are overlooking the fundamental lack of moral authority to invade Iraq. LvMI is about peace. LRC is about peace. Ron Paul is about peace. You're not about peace. You don't see a problem with UN lies to commit mass murder. You don't see a problem with an administration which fabricated false pretenses to go to Iraq and kill tens, if not hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
The more I read of you on hotair, the more certain I am that you're eventually going to burn out here. One neocon sticks out like a sore thumb among a room full of libertarian anarchists. And your pro-violence stance won't help.
Laughing Man:Well see we have this new crazzzzy theory called neocolonialism.
Where is the colony?
Laughing Man:Get this, we can invade and conquer a country then establish a puppet government that does our bidding without even having to leave a substancial military force behind. Pretty wacky isn't it?
Neo-conservatives want to establish a Democratic government friendly to western interests but this has nothing to do with colonization or imperialism, it has to do with nation building and actual neo-conservatism.
Laughing Man:10 year old mustard gas
Would you be willing to test it's potency on yourself? The fact doesn't change over 500 WMDs were found in Iraq.
Laughing Man:low-enriched uranium [ that can't even make a nuclear bomb ]
Can it make a dirty bomb?
Poptech: Neo-conservatives want to establish a Democratic government friendly to western interests but this has nothing to do with colonization or imperialism, it has to do with nation building and actual neo-conservatism.
This has got to be one of the most screwed up sentences I've ever read - and I'm not talking about grammar.
Poptech:Where is the colony?
The answer to that question is the answer to the question 'Where are we invading?'
Poptech:Neo-conservatives want to establish a Democratic government friendly to western interests but this has nothing to do with colonization or imperialism, it has to do with nation building and actual neo-conservatism.
I would define colonization as the establishment of a given area with certain social norms and traditions by a foreign people. Therefore making these countries 'democratic' is in fact an intellectual colonization of western ideas concerning politics and power relations.
And you really don't think that invading a foreign country in order to bring about friendly established institutions is not imperialism? Honestly?
Poptech: Would you be willing to test it's potency on yourself? The fact doesn't change over 500 WMDs were found in Iraq
Would you be willing to test it's potency on yourself? The fact doesn't change over 500 WMDs were found in Iraq
I'm not an idiot so no I wouldn't. I don't recall the war in Iraq being over mustard gas though. It was an implicit nuclear program. Do you honestly think that Saddam was going to get 1,000 Iraqis to lob mustard gas over the Atlantic ocean in an attempt to 'spread terror'? Or wait was he going to sell 10 year old mustard gas to Al-Qaeda, a radical fundamentalist group [ he himself being a radical secularist ]
Poptech:Can it make a dirty bomb?
Sure, but you can also make a bomb out of chlorine, nails, and fertilizer.
liberty student:At LvMI, and particularly in this community, we refer to the Austrian school for definitions, not Yahoo.
If you can freely define words you can just make things up. No dictionary supports that definition. BTW it is not Yahoo but the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.
liberty student:You are not a libertarian.
Oh yes I am a limited government libertarian not a Rothbardian or anacho-capitalist.
liberty student:Wrong. I support it on my property, and I support your regulations and censorship on your property.
No you support regulations that allow you to "feel" powerful here. It is just a different type of control. So long as you make the regulations they are acceptable
liberty student:I'm not lying.
You are, WMDs were found = FACT.
liberty student:Oh really? Americans are coming home from Germany, Japan and Korea? American troops are leaving Iraq with the billion dollar embassy bigger than the Vatican? Who are you kidding? If building temples in other countries, and 50 year occupations isn't proof enough of an empire, I don't know what you think is. Again, you are proposing views no libertarian in good conscience, at least as far as I have seen in the austro-libertarian orbit would endorse.
Can Germany, Japan and Korea make the US leave anytime they want? Having an embassy in a country has nothing to do with an empire. Proof of an empire is what Japan was trying to do in the 30s and 40s. Again you are posting propaganda, I clearly stated I wanted to remove all US troops from foreign soil but that has nothing to do with an empire.
Laughing Man: I heard a really good argument against minarchism by Walter Block a few days ago. Minarchists [ such as yourself ] conclude that anarchy is utopian or unworkable and that there needs to be a mediator such as government in place in order to settle disputes and enforce law. This cannot be done by private corporations or trusts. Yet the world [ in terms of nations ] is in a state of anarchy. Therefore logically speaking, you would have to support world government and if you don't, justify why governments [ who last century killed millions of people ] can sustain themselves in such anarchy yet the individuals of the world cannot.
By the way, am I ever going to get a response to this?
Laughing Man:The answer to that question is the answer to the question 'Where are we invading?'
So where are the colonists?
Laughing Man:I would define colonization as the establishment of a given area with certain social norms and traditions by a foreign people. Therefore making these countries 'democratic' is in fact an intellectual colonization of western ideas concerning politics and power relations.
Since you cannot freely define words either, I don't agree.
Laughing Man:And you really don't think that invading a foreign country in order to bring about friendly established institutions is not imperialism? Honestly?
How could it be? Imperialism is acquiring territory and establishing your rule over the area, this is not happening. Iraq is not a U.S. territory bound by U.S. laws and rule.
Laughing Man:I'm not an idiot so no I wouldn't. I don't recall the war in Iraq being over mustard gas though.
One of the reasons was WMDs and that is what mustard gas is.
Laughing Man:Do you honestly think that Saddam was going to get 1,000 Iraqis to lob mustard gas over the Atlantic ocean in an attempt to 'spread terror'?
No the fear was that he would sell it to people who would bring it into the country.
Laughing Man:Or wait was he going to sell 10 year old mustard gas to Al-Qaeda, a radical fundamentalist group [ he himself being a radical secularist ]
The enemy of your enemy is your friend.
Laughing Man:Sure, but you can also make a bomb out of chlorine, nails, and fertilizer.
It can also be further enriched.
Poptech: liberty student:At LvMI, and particularly in this community, we refer to the Austrian school for definitions, not Yahoo. If you can freely define words you can just make things up. No dictionary supports that definition.
If you can freely define words you can just make things up. No dictionary supports that definition.
Well it takes logic and you know how lacking you are at that. Wasn't it last week you tried to argue with me that light bulbs are NOT light bulbs. I knew right there that any logical discussion with you will NEVER happen.
Poptech: No you support regulations that allow you to "feel" powerful here. It is just a different type of control. So long as you make the regulations they are acceptable
lol - arbitrary governmental mentality. Light bulbs are not light bulbs, property rights mean nothing, and nation building (plural) doesn't mean Empire.
Poptech:If you can freely define words you can just make things up. No dictionary supports that definition.
It doesn't need to. At LvMI, I just gave you the meaning. You're welcome to use alternate meanings on other websites.
Poptech:Oh yes I am a limited government libertarian
That is an oxymoron. It's actually 2 oxymorons. Limited government is an oxymoron, and limited government libertarian is an oxymoron.
Poptech:No you support regulations that allow you to "feel" powerful here.
That you haven't been banned (yet) is a sign of how much restraint is exercised by myself, and other members of the staff. In the community, we're all unpaid volunteers, and put in our own time to handle all sorts of duties.
Poptech: It is just a different type of control. So long as you make the regulations they are acceptable
Again, learn what private property is. Then you can call yourself a conservative. Maybe.
Poptech:You are, WMDs were found = FACT.
Not the WMDs that were the impetus for war.
For the second time,
Report holds out the possibility that WMD may still be found . . . one day
Mr Blair admitted yesterday: "I have to accept, as the months have passed, it seems increasingly clear that at the time of invasion Saddam did not have stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons ready to deploy."
Poptech:Having an embassy in a country has nothing to do with an empire.
The largest embassy in the world, larger than Vatican city? You do know you're on the wrong side of Ron Paul with this, right?
Poptech:Proof of an empire is what Japan was trying to do in the 30s and 40s. Again you are posting propaganda, I clearly stated I wanted to remove all US troops from foreign soil but that has nothing to do with an empire.
Like I said, you're a neocon. And I have no idea why you are at LvMI except to be an agitator in the community.
And that simply will not do. Unlike HotAir, you're not going to get 5 months to flame out here arguing with everyone.
Poptech:So where are the colonists?
US troops right now and there is talk of leaving a base or two behind. You cannot deny this.
Poptech:Since you cannot freely define words either, I don't agree.
Ok
Imperialism
Basically exactly what we are doing to Iraq and Afghanistan, we are 'extending our authority' into their land.
Colonization
Somewhat open ended though my definition of colonization doesn't conflict with it.
Poptech:How could it be? Imperialism is acquiring territory and establishing your rule over the area, this is not happening. Iraq is not a U.S. territory bound by U.S. laws and rule.
So there was no transitory period from law under Saddam to law under the current de facto government? They are both the same series of legislation and rules?
Poptech: One of the reasons was WMDs and that is what mustard gas is.
Ah yes, I clearly remember George Bush talking about all that horrible mustard gas Iraq was possibly making [ this is sarcasm ]
Poptech:No the fear was that he would sell it to people who would bring it into the country.
Ten year old mustard gas...into America...what is Al-Qaeda shopping at the clearance section of the international black market of weapons?
Poptech:The enemy of your enemy is your friend.
This is moronic and I will give an example why. Postulate I hate Socialists. Conservatives too hate socialists. So apparently I should be friends with Conservatives...
Poptech:It can also be further enriched.
Hey look what I discovered. Apparently they couldn't make a dirty bomb out of low-enriched uranium.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-181878742.html
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_iraq_070704,00.html
And where was the Iraq government going to enrich it? In all of those IAEA observed nuclear facilities?
Poptech:Can Germany, Japan and Korea make the US leave anytime they want? Having an embassy in a country has nothing to do with an empire.
Laughing Man: Poptech: One of the reasons was WMDs and that is what mustard gas is. Ah yes, I clearly remember George Bush talking about all that horrible mustard gas Iraq was possibly making [ this is sarcasm ]
I remember Bush's famous MUSHROOM MUSTARD CLOUD speech. lol
wilderness:Well it takes logic and you know how lacking you are at that. Wasn't it last week you tried to argue with me that light bulbs are NOT light bulbs. I knew right there that any logical discussion with you will NEVER happen.
Can you freely define words? The reason we have dictionaries is so we can communicate in the same language with accepted definitions of words. If everyone was free to use whatever meaning they wanted no one would understand each other.
You are still confused about the light bulb discussion, Thomas Edison knew it was a light bulb but if he could not convince anyone of what it was it didn't matter what it was, this did not mean they were not really light bulbs. Nor am I disputing this. My point was you have to prove something not just say it is so.
wilderness:lol - arbitrary governmental mentality. Light bulbs are not light bulbs, property rights mean nothing, and nation building (plural) doesn't mean Empire.
So are these libertarian forums or just a place to for a certain ideology and to restrict discussion to these beliefs? Please define empire from a dictionary.
liberty student:It doesn't need to. At LvMI, I just gave you the meaning. You're welcome to use alternate meanings on other websites.
Is this definition accepted by any dictionary? If not, it is meaningless and you will be unable to properly communicate this word with the outside world. Thus another problem with your ideology.
liberty student:That you haven't been banned (yet) is a sign of how much restraint is exercised by myself, and other members of the staff. In the community, we're all unpaid volunteers, and put in our own time to handle all sorts of duties.
So now you are threatening me, typical of those in power. What would I be banned for? Disagreeing with you? Fascinating.
liberty student:Again, learn what private property is. Then you can call yourself a conservative. Maybe.
I know what private property is and do not call myself a conservative but what I actually am, a limited government libertarian.
liberty student:Not the WMDs that were the impetus for war.
You stated no WMDs were found, this is false and I have proven it so.
liberty student:The largest embassy in the world, larger than Vatican city? You do know you're on the wrong side of Ron Paul with this, right?
Ron Paul does not support embassies?
liberty student:Like I said, you're a neocon. And I have no idea why you are at LvMI except to be an agitator in the community.
Another lie, you have refused to define the word neo-con and keep trying to slander me with it. I am here because I support Mises and Hayek non-anarchist limited government ideology. The fact that I "agitate" non limited government libertarians is something I would expect from the PC police not so called libertarians. Did I hurt someone's "Feelings"? If I agree with you will I now not be an "agitator"? Should I report to the "politbureau" for reeducation?
liberty student:And that simply will not do. Unlike HotAir, you're not going to get 5 months to flame out here arguing with everyone.
I am only allowed to agree with certain people here? So is a new regulation that you are not allowed to argue with anarcho-capitalists and 911 truthers?
Poptech,
A=A: a light bulb is a light bulb. You called it a flaw in one's argument if they could not prove to other people that A=A. I might as well talk to a tree. At least it can't try to argue with me that a light bulb isn't a light bulb. And I can spend worthwhile time with my family. They are, don't take offense , more beautiful and inspirational than trying to communicate with somebody that thinks War is Peace.
Quote from link:
wilderness: So if I say this is a light bulb and it is a light bulb, but nobody will be convinced it's a light bulb - my argument is flawed.
Poptech: Yes of course, if you are unable to convince enough people that a light bulb is a light bulb your argument is flawed.
Yes of course, if you are unable to convince enough people that a light bulb is a light bulb your argument is flawed.
Poptech:but what I actually am, a limited government libertarian.
wilderness:They are, don't take offense , more beautiful and inspirational than trying to communicate with somebody that thinks War is Peace.
Or you could be watching the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes with Jeremy Brett who is the greatest Sherlock Holmes in the history of Sherlock Holmes actors.
Laughing Man:US troops right now and there is talk of leaving a base or two behind. You cannot deny this.
Is this with the concession of the new Iraqi government.
Laughing Man:Basically exactly what we are doing to Iraq and Afghanistan, we are 'extending our authority' into their land.
"the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies."
But we are not doing this, the current governments have the authority.
Laughing Man:So there was no transitory period from law under Saddam to law under the current de facto government? They are both the same series of legislation and rules?
Like I said this is nation building not imperialism.
Laughing Man:Ah yes, I clearly remember George Bush talking about all that horrible mustard gas Iraq was possibly making
They also found sarin shells and enriched uranium, Bush talked about many things including WMDs.
Laughing Man:Ten year old mustard gas...into America...what is Al-Qaeda shopping at the clearance section of the international black market of weapons?
Al-Qaeda would appear to buy everything on the black market and I doubt they would demand brand new WMDs if offered.
Laughing Man:This is moronic and I will give an example why. Postulate I hate Socialists. Conservatives too hate socialists. So apparently I should be friends with Conservatives...
Friendly, yes, one of my other points.
Laughing Man:Hey look what I discovered. Apparently they couldn't make a dirty bomb out of low-enriched uranium.
Look what your article says.
"...and hundreds of highly radioactive items that could have been used in a so-called dirty bomb. ...some of the other radioactive material - including cesium-137, colbalt-60 and strontium - could have been valuable to a terrorist seeking to fashion a terror weapon. The low-enriched uranium taken from Iraq, if it is of the 3 percent to 5 percent level of enrichment common in fuel for commercial power reactors, could have been of value to a country developing enrichment technology. It speeds up the process," Oelrich said, adding that 1.95 tons of low-enriched uranium could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a single nuclear bomb."
Laughing Man:And where was the Iraq government going to enrich it? In all of those IAEA observed nuclear facilities?
Did Saddam kick out the inspectors?
Juan: Are you saying that all the amerikkkan military bases in germany and japan are just an 'embassy' ?
I never said they were an embassy, they are clearly military bases but with the the concession of the government of those countries. Do you deny this?
wilderness:At least it can't try to argue with me that a light bulb isn't a light bulb.
If light bulbs did not exist and your invented it but just went around declaring it so would people believe you or would you have convince them. My again is not denying the existence of light bulbs but trying to explain to you why you need to prove and convince people of your position.
Poptech: Is this with the concession of the new Iraqi government.
Do you think the Iraqi government really has a choice in the matter?
Poptech: But we are not doing this, the current governments have the authority.
Simple question: How did the current government get into power?
Poptech:Like I said this is nation building not imperialism
They are one in the same. You need authority/rule to deconstruct an old regime and recreate a new one.
Poptech: They also found sarin shells and enriched uranium, Bush talked about many things including WMDs.
He talked about nuclear bombs. Not 10 year old weapons buried in the ground.
Poptech: Al-Qaeda would appear to buy everything on the black market and I doubt they would demand brand new WMDs if offered.
Well that is moronic. You are saying if offered a nuclear suitcase, Al-Qaeda would say 'no thanks'?
Poptech:Friendly, yes, one of my other points.
That is ridiculous. Let's be friendly with people we are diametrically opposed
Poptech:..and hundreds of highly radioactive items that could have been used in a so-called dirty bomb
Oh yes, they are going to convert medical radioactive items into dirty bombs. Stop the presses, we need to confiscate all x-ray machines so Al-Qaeda doesn't take up an engineering class and discover this untapped resource.
Poptech:...some of the other radioactive material - including cesium-137, colbalt-60 and strontium - could have been valuable to a terrorist seeking to fashion a terror weapon.
You are likely to find these elements throughout the world. So you deduce that Al-Qaeda, a group that doesn't want to attract overt attention, sulks into one of the heaviest sanctioned countries in the middle east to buy rare elements, this of course coming from an organization that has a supposed global presence.
Poptech: The low-enriched uranium taken from Iraq, if it is of the 3 percent to 5 percent level of enrichment common in fuel for commercial power reactors, could have been of value to a country developing enrichment technology.
The low-enriched uranium taken from Iraq, if it is of the 3 percent to 5 percent level of enrichment common in fuel for commercial power reactors, could have been of value to a country developing enrichment technology.
Do I see an implied demand for global trade regulation?
Poptech:It speeds up the process," Oelrich said, adding that 1.95 tons of low-enriched uranium could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a single nuclear bomb.
Of course it could the question is was it?
Poptech:Did Saddam kick out the inspectors?
Doesn't he always?
Laughing Man: wilderness:They are, don't take offense , more beautiful and inspirational than trying to communicate with somebody that thinks War is Peace. Or you could be watching the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes with Jeremy Brett who is the greatest Sherlock Holmes in the history of Sherlock Holmes actors.
Is that on TV? My TV isn't hooked up with the outside world. That's funny you bring this up. I'm currently reading all the original Sherlock stories by Doyle from the Strand Magazine. Complete with originally reproduced illustrations. After I got the book at the library I went on-line to check out it's history to get some background, and discovered there is a Sherlock Holmes hollywood movie coming out in December but I don't know if I'll see it or not. Maybe I'll rent it. I'm not that big on movies.
I like justice and wanted a break from reading Aristotle and Aquinas. Something to break up the mood. The stories are really an excellent, intriguing read, full of Holmes deductive logic. It's interesting that the police and some others argue against his deductive logic, but it's all strawmen from their lack of understanding. They want facts and evidence, but his deductions come from inductive facts and evidence. He corrects them on these points and dazzles them with his intellectual and sensory keenness. But more importantly for the moment - it's a fun read.
Poptech, if you think "nation building" is different than imperialism, then you must believe that the Japanese Empire didn't Manchuria, which was governed by an "independant" bunch.
wilderness: full of Holmes deductive logic. It's interesting that the police and some others argue against his deductive logic, but it's all strawmen from their lack of understanding. They want facts and evidence, but his deductions come from inductive facts and evidence. He corrects them on these points and dazzles them with his intellectual and sensory keenness. But more importantly for the moment - it's a fun read
I'm trying to discover if Sherlock Holmes is a rationalist or a empiricist. He seems to keep on bouncing back and forth.