IRAN - What would you do?

POSTED BY: Jongsstraw
UPDATED: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 06:49
VIEWED: 6354
PAGE 5 of 8

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

KWICKO

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 6:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Excuse me, but... WHAT THE FUCK?! You might want to go back and double-check yourself, because you're attributing shit to me that I didn't write and never said. Or, to put it bluntly, you're lying, and trying to claim it as "disorting" at the same time.

Might wanna look to that.

You are, in fact , correct. I did mistakenly attribute the original quoted post to you instead of JongStraw. I had no intention of attacking him or you, merely attributing the quotes to the proper source. If in any way, I have offended you or Jong by doing this, I apologize. I surely thought I had seen your screen name associated with the post, but was wrong.

Nah, we're all good. Well, we have some disagreements on Iran, it seems, but other than that, I think we're okay.

By the way, we're cross-posting, it would seem.

You mistook me for someone else, I went full attack-dog about it, things were said, apologies were made all around, and I *think* we're back where we should be.

By the way, I've gone back and edited my blow-up, so we're only discussing the misattribution.

On the other stuff, we can discuss it further, or agree to disagree.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 6:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Yeah, Byte - I saw that and just kinda blew up.

Sorry to all - especially NOBC.

Should I go back and edit my post to remove the more over-the-top stuff?

Now mind, some of that I'll stand behind. I'm not "pro-Iran", or "pro-Muslim" or "pro-terrorist". Frankly, it should be at least a little bit offensive that even at this stage, anyone who isn't gung-ho for bombing the living fuck out of any nation even the slightest bit browner than us, or whose people might worship a different set of beliefs, is seen as "patriotic". And opposing such behavior is seen as "un-American".

Let it stand. Bear in mind, of course, that I was not attacking *Y*O*U*.

And that is not my opinion of foreign policy. I don't believe in bombing the living fuck out of anybody, at least not at this moment.

I do not like people distorting what I post for their own purposes. I don't mind my stuff being edited for redundancy or bad grammar, as long as my original point is expressed correctly , but to go inside a 3rd party's quote to edit and distort something I posted, that he posted correctly, is not proper.

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 6:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Nah, we're all good. Well, we have some disagreements on Iran, it seems, but other than that, I think we're okay.

By the way, we're cross-posting, it would seem.

You mistook me for someone else, I went full attack-dog about it, things were said, apologies were made all around, and I *think* we're back where we should be.

" I will be on the Klissoura Road, at midnight, with my sabre, should you have any other need of me..." Thank you, Bernard Shaw...

KWICKO

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 6:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Nah, we're all good. Well, we have some disagreements on Iran, it seems, but other than that, I think we're okay.

By the way, we're cross-posting, it would seem.

You mistook me for someone else, I went full attack-dog about it, things were said, apologies were made all around, and I *think* we're back where we should be.

" I will be on the Klissoura Road, at midnight, with my sabre, should you have any other need of me..." Thank you, Bernard Shaw...

Now, ummmm... you KNOW I'm a big fan of sniper rifles, right? You SURE you wanna just bring a sabre?

(And I'm just playin'. NOBC and I haven't got any real issues, far as I know)

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 6:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by piratenews:
They also own a bunch of Denny's restaurants.

And Mini Marts, and Gas Stations, and Tobacco Shops...

All of which have provided friendly, honest service and benefit the community at large even when that community sneers at them for being the acceptable target heritage and culture of the week, even if they happen to be from some OTHER country, culture or theology - and they take it with pretty good grace, most of em, better than we would, for damn sure.

I am still very, very pissed off over what happened to the gas station on the main drag in my former township(1)

He was trying to emigrate, see - and mind you, this was a nice guy, although his wife wasn't and always naggin on him... what IS it with these guys wifes when they come over here that suddenly they become so goddamn ferocious ?

Anyhows, he had paperwork problems made harder cause english wasn't his native language and he was trying his damndest to solve them, he even asked me to look up stuff for him, cause our immigration law is a fekkin nightmare of red tape and hassle.

And then, some time when I was out on the east coast sorting out a family situation, Immigration showed up with DeptHomeSec and fucking black bagged his ass right there on main street in broad daylight, boom - just took him off and nobody said a goddamn thing - had I been there, woulda gone different maybe.

And now, that station sits empty, weeds growing up through cracked pavement, an empty shell bereft of his quick smile and sharp sounding laugh like they never existed in the first place, like HE never existed in the first place, and no one says a bloody thing.

Even more annoying is that his "competition", the american owned gas station a quarter mile up the road, had something to do with it, at least the complaint that started it - and unlike him, they are a pack of dishonest ripoff shitheels who charge several cents more and have been repeatedly fined for bulking out their fuel with waste motor oil, not meeting octane requirements and rigging the pumps to short gallons.

So I seriously advise you not to bitch to ME, about businesses owned and operated by middle easterners, cause I myself have found them more honest(2) than american business owners by a damned long swipe, right-O ?

-Frem

(1) Which has, sadly, fallen to corruption already with secret 2-minute long, closed door meetings in the middle of the night, with which they appointed a VERY corrupt cop to be in charge of their so-called police dept, such as it is with only two cops cause the rest went to prison, and one tremendously beat up, falling apart squad car since the pretty shiny one has mechanical problems that would make replacing it cheaper than trying to fix it - they got ALL that shit done including the water main and street repaving, and a break even budget, but I guess the job has corrupted them, being that their entire purpose behind that was revenue-generation by ticketing people, cause you sure as hell don't need a whole goddamn police force for a town less than a mile square with a crime rate of maybe two vandalisms and petty thefts a month.

(2) Baksheesh aside, culturally when it comes to straight up business, they ARE more honest, with an almost religious dedication to it.

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 7:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

as Posted by NOBC:
" I will be on the Klissoura Road, at midnight, with my sabre, should you have any other need of me..." Thank you, Bernard Shaw...

Now, ummmm... you KNOW I'm a big fan of sniper rifles, right? You SURE you wanna just bring a sabre?

(And I'm just playin'. NOBC and I haven't got any real issues, far as I know)

And Shaw's other character in the same scene has the next line: " That's a cavalryman's proposal. I'll bring a cannon."
Just playin' right back...

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 7:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

labeling a lack of hostility towards Iran as "pro-Iran."

I just looked up both " pro" and "con" in my Webster's Unabridged Dictionary. I'm too lazy to type it all, but "pro" is defined as supporting or agreeing with, while "con" is defined as disagreeing or opposing. Neither uses the word "hostility", but a LACK of hostility would have to be part of agreeing with or supporting, and the presence of hostility could certainly be a part of opposing or disagreeing, depending on how strongly one disagrees, don't you think?

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 7:22 PM

Quote:
I just looked up both " pro" and "con" in my Webster's Unabridged Dictionary. I'm too lazy to type it all, but "pro" is defined as supporting or agreeing with, while "con" is defined as disagreeing or opposing. Neither uses the word "hostility", but a LACK of hostility would have to be part of agreeing with or supporting, and the presence of hostility could certainly be a part of opposing or disagreeing, depending on how strongly one disagrees, don't you think?

I disagree with Israel's use of chemical weapons on Palestinians and their settlements of the Gaza strip ("your right to swing your arm ends at my nose," I decry all the regional violence no matter who commits it), but I am not hostile towards Israel. I do not agree with Iran that they should be "wiped off the map" or "vanish from the pages of history" or whatever the quote is. The people of Israel are there now, perhaps through unfortunate meddling, but because they are there they should be allowed to build lives for themselves and have self-determination as much as the pre-existing countries in the region have. They are all nations with real populations of citizens - people - stuck in a crapshoot. I have sympathy for all of them.

However, it's very unlikely for someone to be hostile and AGREE, I'll admit.

"I agree with you - punch!"

Hostility and agreement are contradictions, I'll grant you. But there is a difference between mere disagreement and hostility. Disagreement can become hostility with stronger forms of disagreement, but not necessarily. A fierce debate and strong disagreement, even disgust at the opposing viewpoint can be had without the argument turning to threats and violence. And hostility does not always come from disagreement, it has other sources as well. As such, hostility and disagreement are not synonymous... As we can see in this civil discussion we are having.

KWICKO

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 7:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

as Posted by NOBC:
" I will be on the Klissoura Road, at midnight, with my sabre, should you have any other need of me..." Thank you, Bernard Shaw...

Now, ummmm... you KNOW I'm a big fan of sniper rifles, right? You SURE you wanna just bring a sabre?

(And I'm just playin'. NOBC and I haven't got any real issues, far as I know)

And Shaw's other character in the same scene has the next line: " That's a cavalryman's proposal. I'll bring a cannon."
Just playin' right back...

Good line!

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 7:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

I disagree with Israel's use of chemical weapons on Palestinians and their settlements of the Gaza strip ("your right to swing your arm ends at my nose," I decry all the regional violence no matter who commits it), but I am not hostile towards Israel. I do not agree with Iran that they should be "wiped off the map" or "vanish from the pages of history" or whatever the quote is. The people of Israel are there now, perhaps through unfortunate meddling, but because they are there they should be allowed to build lives for themselves and have self-determination as much as the pre-existing countries in the region have. They are all nations with real populations of citizens - people - stuck in a crapshoot. I have sympathy for all of them.

( snip some )

A fierce debate and strong disagreement, even disgust at the opposing viewpoint can be had without the argument turning to threats and violence. And hostility does not always come from disagreement, it has other sources as well. As such, hostility and disagreement are not synonymous... As we can see in this civil discussion we are having.

We ain't talking about Israel or Iran, either one, at this little moment. We are ( or at least I was ) posting about the correct grammatical usage of the terms " pro" and " con". On the question of Israel, I think it's best to table that argument for the here and now. We seem to disagree, and it's not the type of disagreement that can be resolved quickly or easily.

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE