Americans killed in a single day: Al-Qaeda vs Confederacy

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Very few things right? Hmm, an interesting view, that you apparently feel needs the qualifying cover of a broadened context than we were discussing.

My defining just what I think your beliefs make you is not a personal attack. I cannot understand anyone saying the United States of America has gotten most everything wrong since day one, then saying they love America. Is it a concept and not a reality you love?

I make a distinction between the government and the country, in this sense. You list some things that the government has done that I object to, and then ask whether I like America. Clearly you're asking whether I like the U.S. government, and the answer is no. The U.S. government has done horrible things in its history, and it is doing horrible things today. What is there to like?

You keep trying to substitute the individual governments, the entity of the United States of America, with an idea, an intellectual dream, what America should be or can be as opposed to what it actually has been. You like the idea but not the reality, so again, I ask you, why do you dislike the United States (America) so much?

The United States has gotten things wrong in it's history, and in most cases the United States has tried to remedy the wrongs, but those instances are neither (in my not so humble opinion) the majority of it's actions or the worst actions in the history of it's humanity.

Thinking historically, I do not judge the actions of the United States today in a snapshot view of time, or in the context of the moment. I said before, I love the United States, flaws and all.

There is no remedy for mass murder, torture, and imperialism. The only thing that can be done is to stop doing those things. When the U.S. government does stop doing them, then maybe my opinion of that government will change.

 

[Dante]

Are you trying to imply that I'm a terrorist sympathizer?

Not at all. I say simply that terrorist sympathizers make the same distinctions when arguing for war waged against the United States while saying they love America. I do wonder if you would sympathize with Americans who wanted to declare war on the United States as the Confederacy did. Would you -- sympathize with them?

You have said you are a sympathizer of the traitorous Confederacy, which was granted an amnesty so long as they gave up their traitorous ways.

No. I wouldn't support any secessionist movement in the sense that I would advocate for secession. If any state wished to secede, however, I would support their right to do so. I don't support war, as it's nothing more than state sanctioned mass murder, but if the federal government decided to wage war to keep a state within the Union then I would have no problem openly supporting that state defending itself.

I'm not a supporter of the Confederacy, I'm a supporter of the right of the Confederacy to secede from the Union.

The Confederacy and others like them, will always have to declare war on the USA in order to declare themselves independent, unless they do so by the means left open to them. I linked to a Supreme Court decision that gave this scenario, yet you belittled teh court.

You are all over the place, yet nowhere. You are stuck on principles without real world applications. You are a dreamer calling for war against the United States, yet you do not have the courage of your convictions: you're a classic Libertarian.

So you are not a supporter of the Confederacy? Then why did you defend them so? You denied they declared warm declared rebellion, committed treason. They were granted amnesty.

Their symbols are hostile symbols.

 

[Dante]

I make a distinction between the government and the country, in this sense. You list some things that the government has done that I object to, and then ask whether I like America. Clearly you're asking whether I like the U.S. government, and the answer is no. The U.S. government has done horrible things in its history, and it is doing horrible things today. What is there to like?

You keep trying to substitute the individual governments, the entity of the United States of America, with an idea, an intellectual dream, what America should be or can be as opposed to what it actually has been. You like the idea but not the reality, so again, I ask you, why do you dislike the United States (America) so much?

The United States has gotten things wrong in it's history, and in most cases the United States has tried to remedy the wrongs, but those instances are neither (in my not so humble opinion) the majority of it's actions or the worst actions in the history of it's humanity.

Thinking historically, I do not judge the actions of the United States today in a snapshot view of time, or in the context of the moment. I said before, I love the United States, flaws and all.

There is no remedy for mass murder, torture, and imperialism. The only thing that can be done is to stop doing those things. When the U.S. government does stop doing them, then maybe my opinion of that government will change.

I have no idea where you ran.

You've said before you did not agree with the Supreme Court precedents, or in case law that has established how America (the United States) has grown, governed and existed. You claim America (the United States) has gotten most everything wrong, yet you claim to love America while hating the governments.

You run to American interests worldwide, geopolitics, after arguing for pages against the American government at it's most basic level, how it governs itself.

 

[Dante]

What is it about America that you, kevin_kennedy loves? The idea? What idea? What about the reality...the America people have fought and died for?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Not at all. I say simply that terrorist sympathizers make the same distinctions when arguing for war waged against the United States while saying they love America. I do wonder if you would sympathize with Americans who wanted to declare war on the United States as the Confederacy did. Would you -- sympathize with them?

You have said you are a sympathizer of the traitorous Confederacy, which was granted an amnesty so long as they gave up their traitorous ways.

No. I wouldn't support any secessionist movement in the sense that I would advocate for secession. If any state wished to secede, however, I would support their right to do so. I don't support war, as it's nothing more than state sanctioned mass murder, but if the federal government decided to wage war to keep a state within the Union then I would have no problem openly supporting that state defending itself.

I'm not a supporter of the Confederacy, I'm a supporter of the right of the Confederacy to secede from the Union.

The Confederacy and others like them, will always have to declare war on the USA in order to declare themselves independent, unless they do so by the means left open to them. I linked to a Supreme Court decision that gave this scenario, yet you belittled teh court.

You are all over the place, yet nowhere. You are stuck on principles without real world applications. You are a dreamer calling for war against the United States, yet you do not have the courage of your convictions: you're a classic Libertarian.

So you are not a supporter of the Confederacy? Then why did you defend them so? You denied they declared warm declared rebellion, committed treason. They were granted amnesty.

Their symbols are hostile symbols.

You have no consistent set of principles, so there's no reason to continue this discussion.

 

[Dante]

You have no consistent set of principles, so there's no reason to continue this discussion.

what a crock of shit. I have stuck by the principles I believe in throughout this whole thread. You have been hard pressed to stick to your principles without retreating into denial and an effort to sidetrack what your principles obviously lead to.

 

[JBeukema]

Americans killed in a single day: Al-Qaeda vs Confederacy

Guess who cased the death of 7,000 Americans in a single day -- in no less than 20 minutes? Yep you guessed it right, the Confederacy. Yet we still have traitorous Americans proudly flying the Confederate Flag.

I went down south and saw all those forts, and statues celebrating the Confederacy. I wonder, will Al-Qaeda be celebrated? Maybe not, they only killed 3,000 people, not all Americans and it took a lot longer than 20 minutes.

Oh that is just brilliant, a confederacy vs. taliban analogy, wow, you have really outdone yourself. I guess the union should have planned better at Antietam.

Do you ever stop sucking dick long enough to think begore you post?

What made you think of sucking dick when you read the above posts?

 

[JBeukema]

Did al Qaeda torture their slaves?

this thread is not about al qaeda.

Americans killed in a single day: Al-Qaeda vs Confederacy

Clearly, you're retarded.

 

[JBeukema]

What I want to know is why Kevin has Col. Sanders as his avatar...

 

[Douger]

zzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[CurveLight]

I'm not running an English class for English as a second language.

Synonym: 1 : one of two or more words or expressions of the same language that have the same or nearly the same meaning in some or all senses.

I told you before to look up differences with distinctions. you obviously have not, or you are not half as smart than previously given credit for.

synonyms are not always interchangeable with exacting meanings. as a matter of fact, synonyms are usually poor substitutes for exact meanings.

I know you aren't running an ESL class because you can't even write an op or read posts. I never said synonyms have exacting meanings so shove that strawman to the side. Once again:

Let me help you understand. By your own words you state:

"....I did not intend to establish similarity by analogy."

Then what is the similarity by? If it is not to be "similarity by analogy" that means there is the intension of similiarity, but not specifically by analogy....so:

Similarity by ?

Go ahead and dodge it again.

 

[Dante]

I'm not running an English class for English as a second language.

Synonym: 1 : one of two or more words or expressions of the same language that have the same or nearly the same meaning in some or all senses.

I told you before to look up differences with distinctions. you obviously have not, or you are not half as smart than previously given credit for.

synonyms are not always interchangeable with exacting meanings. as a matter of fact, synonyms are usually poor substitutes for exact meanings.

I know you aren't running an ESL class because you can't even write an op or read posts. I never said synonyms have exacting meanings so shove that strawman to the side. Once again:

Let me help you understand. By your own words you state:

"....I did not intend to establish similarity by analogy."

Then what is the similarity by? If it is not to be "similarity by analogy" that means there is the intension of similiarity, but not specifically by analogy....so:

Similarity by ?

Go ahead and dodge it again.

still stuck on stupid? you get a bite and hold on for dear life? you hold on so tight you can't see where the fuck you're headed or where you've been?

sigh

I used the term comparison.

kevin had used the term analogy.

All I can imagine (by way of a quick deduction) is that kevin must have used the term analogy assuming any similarities between the situations listed made for an analogy.

but I was not attempting an analogy. see? following along so far?

---

why did I inject the term similarity into the sentence?

as a short hand way of letting kevin know he was mistaking any similarities for an attempt at analogy.

you got a hard on thinking I was saying I used similarities as a way of comparison in place of similarities by analogy. I did not.

what you did was read something into things that was never there to begin with. you got stuck on stupid. see?

no big deal. It happens.


dD


---

I'm not dodging anything. I'm just bored when dealing with an average troll with a limited grasp of how to play.

and, I rarely suffer fools gladly.

but in your case, I make an exception? why? I'm bored. see?

you use a quote out of context in the above post. I suspect your mind took out of context, the phrase you got a hard on for. It's a quirk of a mind attempting to grasp a simple yet complex thought.

 

[CurveLight]

I'm not running an English class for English as a second language.

Synonym: 1 : one of two or more words or expressions of the same language that have the same or nearly the same meaning in some or all senses.

I told you before to look up differences with distinctions. you obviously have not, or you are not half as smart than previously given credit for.

synonyms are not always interchangeable with exacting meanings. as a matter of fact, synonyms are usually poor substitutes for exact meanings.

I know you aren't running an ESL class because you can't even write an op or read posts. I never said synonyms have exacting meanings so shove that strawman to the side. Once again:

Let me help you understand. By your own words you state:

"....I did not intend to establish similarity by analogy."

Then what is the similarity by? If it is not to be "similarity by analogy" that means there is the intension of similiarity, but not specifically by analogy....so:

Similarity by ?

Go ahead and dodge it again.

still stuck on stupid? you get a bite and hold on for dear life? you hold on so tight you can't see where the fuck you're headed or where you've been?

sigh

I used the term comparison.

kevin had used the term analogy.

All I can imagine (by way of a quick deduction) is that kevin must have used the term analogy assuming any similarities between the situations listed made for an analogy.

but I was not attempting an analogy. see? following along so far?

---

why did I inject the term similarity into the sentence?

as a short hand way of letting kevin know he was mistaking any similarities for an attempt at analogy.

you got a hard on thinking I was saying I used similarities as a way of comparison in place of similarities by analogy. I did not.

what you did was read something into things that was never there to begin with. you got stuck on stupid. see?

no big deal. It happens.


dD


---

I'm not dodging anything. I'm just bored when dealing with an average troll with a limited grasp of how to play.

and, I rarely suffer fools gladly.

but in your case, I make an exception? why? I'm bored. see?

you use a quote out of context in the above post. I suspect your mind took out of context, the phrase you got a hard on for. It's a quirk of a mind attempting to grasp a simple yet complex thought.

Then what is the comparison being made?

 

[Dante]

I know you aren't running an ESL class because you can't even write an op or read posts. I never said synonyms have exacting meanings so shove that strawman to the side. Once again:

Let me help you understand. By your own words you state:

"....I did not intend to establish similarity by analogy."

Then what is the similarity by? If it is not to be "similarity by analogy" that means there is the intension of similiarity, but not specifically by analogy....so:

Similarity by ?

Go ahead and dodge it again.

still stuck on stupid? you get a bite and hold on for dear life? you hold on so tight you can't see where the fuck you're headed or where you've been?

sigh

I used the term comparison.

kevin had used the term analogy.

All I can imagine (by way of a quick deduction) is that kevin must have used the term analogy assuming any similarities between the situations listed made for an analogy.

but I was not attempting an analogy. see? following along so far?

---

why did I inject the term similarity into the sentence?

as a short hand way of letting kevin know he was mistaking any similarities for an attempt at analogy.

you got a hard on thinking I was saying I used similarities as a way of comparison in place of similarities by analogy. I did not.

what you did was read something into things that was never there to begin with. you got stuck on stupid. see?

no big deal. It happens.


dD


---

I'm not dodging anything. I'm just bored when dealing with an average troll with a limited grasp of how to play.

and, I rarely suffer fools gladly.

but in your case, I make an exception? why? I'm bored. see?

you use a quote out of context in the above post. I suspect your mind took out of context, the phrase you got a hard on for. It's a quirk of a mind attempting to grasp a simple yet complex thought.

Then what is the comparison being made?

Americans killed in a single day: Al-Qaeda vs Confederacy

Guess who cased the death of 7,000 Americans in a single day -- in no less than 20 minutes? Yep you guessed it right, the Confederacy. Yet we still have traitorous Americans proudly flying the Confederate Flag.

I went down south and saw all those forts, and statues celebrating the Confederacy. I wonder, will Al-Qaeda be celebrated? Maybe not, they only killed 3,000 people, not all of them Americans, and it took a lot longer than 20 minutes.

The cause of death of Americans in a single day.

Al-Qeada and the Confederacy.

One caused the deaths of 3,000 people, not all Americans, but mostly Americans. And Americans (myself among them) puke at the mention of the name, al qaeda. The other caused the death of 7,000 Americans in a single day -- in a mere 20 minutes. And Americans today fly the flag of this Confederacy.

When we finally get rid of the menace of Al qaeda, will we have to one day put up with Americans flying the flag of al qaeda? Calling al qaeda's cause a noble cause?

 

[CurveLight]

I'm not running an English class for English as a second language.

Synonym: 1 : one of two or more words or expressions of the same language that have the same or nearly the same meaning in some or all senses.

I told you before to look up differences with distinctions. you obviously have not, or you are not half as smart than previously given credit for.

synonyms are not always interchangeable with exacting meanings. as a matter of fact, synonyms are usually poor substitutes for exact meanings.

I know you aren't running an ESL class because you can't even write an op or read posts. I never said synonyms have exacting meanings so shove that strawman to the side. Once again:

Let me help you understand. By your own words you state:

"....I did not intend to establish similarity by analogy."

Then what is the similarity by? If it is not to be "similarity by analogy" that means there is the intension of similiarity, but not specifically by analogy....so:

Similarity by ?

Go ahead and dodge it again.

still stuck on stupid? you get a bite and hold on for dear life? you hold on so tight you can't see where the fuck you're headed or where you've been?

sigh

I used the term comparison.

kevin had used the term analogy.

All I can imagine (by way of a quick deduction) is that kevin must have used the term analogy assuming any similarities between the situations listed made for an analogy.

but I was not attempting an analogy. see? following along so far?

---

why did I inject the term similarity into the sentence?

as a short hand way of letting kevin know he was mistaking any similarities for an attempt at analogy.

you got a hard on thinking I was saying I used similarities as a way of comparison in place of similarities by analogy. I did not.

what you did was read something into things that was never there to begin with. you got stuck on stupid. see?

no big deal. It happens.


dD


---

I'm not dodging anything. I'm just bored when dealing with an average troll with a limited grasp of how to play.

and, I rarely suffer fools gladly.

but in your case, I make an exception? why? I'm bored. see?

you use a quote out of context in the above post. I suspect your mind took out of context, the phrase you got a hard on for. It's a quirk of a mind attempting to grasp a simple yet complex thought.

still stuck on stupid? you get a bite and hold on for dear life? you hold on so tight you can't see where the fuck you're headed or where you've been?

sigh

I used the term comparison.

kevin had used the term analogy.

All I can imagine (by way of a quick deduction) is that kevin must have used the term analogy assuming any similarities between the situations listed made for an analogy.

but I was not attempting an analogy. see? following along so far?

---

why did I inject the term similarity into the sentence?

as a short hand way of letting kevin know he was mistaking any similarities for an attempt at analogy.

you got a hard on thinking I was saying I used similarities as a way of comparison in place of similarities by analogy. I did not.

what you did was read something into things that was never there to begin with. you got stuck on stupid. see?

no big deal. It happens.


dD


---

I'm not dodging anything. I'm just bored when dealing with an average troll with a limited grasp of how to play.

and, I rarely suffer fools gladly.

but in your case, I make an exception? why? I'm bored. see?

you use a quote out of context in the above post. I suspect your mind took out of context, the phrase you got a hard on for. It's a quirk of a mind attempting to grasp a simple yet complex thought.

Then what is the comparison being made?

Americans killed in a single day: Al-Qaeda vs Confederacy

Guess who cased the death of 7,000 Americans in a single day -- in no less than 20 minutes? Yep you guessed it right, the Confederacy. Yet we still have traitorous Americans proudly flying the Confederate Flag.

I went down south and saw all those forts, and statues celebrating the Confederacy. I wonder, will Al-Qaeda be celebrated? Maybe not, they only killed 3,000 people, not all of them Americans, and it took a lot longer than 20 minutes.

The cause of death of Americans in a single day.

Al-Qeada and the Confederacy.

One caused the deaths of 3,000 people, not all Americans, but mostly Americans. And Americans (myself among them) puke at the mention of the name, al qaeda. The other caused the death of 7,000 Americans in a single day -- in a mere 20 minutes. And Americans today fly the flag of this Confederacy.

When we finally get rid of the menace of Al qaeda, will we have to one day put up with Americans flying the flag of al qaeda? Calling al qaeda's cause a noble cause?

Thank you for admitting you are comparing the South to Al qaeda.

 

[Dante]

Thank you for admitting you are comparing the South to Al qaeda.

so, are you a professional idiot? did you even read the OP? It is quite obvious to the most dense (or so I thought) what I was arguing.

I compared the old South, the Confederacy, to al-qaeda. The comparison took the form of the amount of Americans killed in a single day -- cause -- the hostilities each initiated against the United States.

Al-Qaeda and the Confederacy, both declared war on the United States. what do you not get about those facts?

 

[CurveLight]

Thank you for admitting you are comparing the South to Al qaeda.

so, are you a professional idiot? did you even read the OP? It is quite obvious to the most dense (or so I thought) what I was arguing.

I compared the old South, the Confederacy, to al-qaeda. The comparison took the form of the amount of Americans killed in a single day -- cause -- the hostilities each initiated against the United States.

Al-Qaeda and the Confederacy, both declared war on the United States. what do you not get about those facts?

That is an analogy you dumbfuck.

 

[hortysir]

Next we'll compare cigarette smoking to Hezbullah.

Cigarettes kill more Americans than Hammas and Hezbullah, combined.

We must now wage a war against RJ Reynolds.

 

[Dante]

Thank you for admitting you are comparing the South to Al qaeda.

so, are you a professional idiot? did you even read the OP? It is quite obvious to the most dense (or so I thought) what I was arguing.

I compared the old South, the Confederacy, to al-qaeda. The comparison took the form of the amount of Americans killed in a single day -- cause -- the hostilities each initiated against the United States.

Al-Qaeda and the Confederacy, both declared war on the United States. what do you not get about those facts?

That is an analogy you dumbfuck.

analogy 1 : inference that if two or more things agree with one another in some respects they will probably agree in others

--

you are drawing the analogy, not my argument in the OP. see?

the comparison: number of Americans killed in one day, by 2 different enemies of the United States.

fact: Al-Qaeda and the Confederacy both declared war on the United States.

fact: the Confederacy and Al-Qaeda are/were both enemies of the United states

fact: Some Americans fly the Confederate flag

argument it is a traitorous act for an American to proudly fly the flag of an enemy of the United States who has killed American citizens.

----------------

where is the analogy? come on. you can do it if you try hard enough. where is the analogy you say I am making where the comparison is drawn? we know what the two things that agree with one another in some respects are (2 enemies killed Americans). where is/are the one or another ways, in which my argument suggests they will agree?

 

[Dante]

Next we'll compare cigarette smoking to Hezbullah.

Cigarettes kill more Americans than Hammas and Hezbullah, combined.

We must now wage a war against RJ Reynolds.

D'oh!


Cancer and drugs kill Americans, and silly people declare war (in a generic and in many ways, a meaningless method) on cancer and drugs, as they do on the generic term of terrorism.

I have yet to hear anyone call for a war against R.J. Reynolds, until today. Does R.J. Reynolds have symbols they bring into battle as they wage war against Americans? Do the Congress and the President know RJR has declared war on the United States? Is your position that RJR is an enemy of the United States?

---

I compared Al-Qaeda and the Confederacy, two entities that declared war on the United States, and in the process caused the deaths of a certain amount of Americans in a single day.