PDA

View Full Version : Public opinion reports (PIPA)



novacain
02-01-2005, 10:03 AM
Interesting stuff here.
"Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) carries out research on public opinion"
http://www.pipa.org/

If your American, thinking of traveling, here is what the locals will think of you...
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/BBCworldpoll/html/bbcpoll011905.html

"The poll also finds that for a substantial minority worldwide these negative feelings about Bush have generalized to the American people."


Go to page 12 and look at the list of news stations and the percentage of viewers have 'misperceptions'. (ie Iraq had WMD)
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/Media_10_02_03_Report.pdf

"Standing out in the analysis are Fox and NPR/PBS--but for opposite reasons. Fox was the news source whose viewers had the most misperceptions."


"The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters"
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf

"To preserve the belief that that going to war was the right decision, it appears necessary for Bush supporters to believe that the assumptions that prompted going to war were correct."

Scary views on the allowing torture under 'exceptional' circumstances...like we think he's a terrorist.
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Torture/Report07_22_04.pdf

"one argument was found convincing by a more robust 63%.
“Whenever possible, military interrogators should limit themselves to methods that are humane and consistent with international conventions. However, at times, military necessity may call for making exceptions to these rules.” "

ober
02-01-2005, 10:12 AM
Wow. Turkey really hates us.

But I really don't find any of that to be a surprise. My step-grandmother said the other nite that she doesn't know how Bush got re-elected. She compared people's feelings towards him to the feelings people had for Nixon, and according to her, "people HATED Nixon".

I really don't think the people that voted for Bush have a feel for how the rest of the world views us and what Bush has done to that persona. I really cannot fathom that we have that many people that like him.

no-one
02-01-2005, 01:44 PM
Edit: all that follows is MY opinion... and i feel in no way obligated to justify myself to ANYONE so dont bother...

no disrespect to novacain here, but this is just propaganda, opinion poll's are bullI am sillyI am sillyI am sillyI am silly and always will be... i don't buy the numbers in the slightest... the VAST majority of the world(U.S. included) is terribly misinformed and most really don't care about anything outside their daily lives... even if they act like it its all psycology... people are stupid(me to an amazing extent) and they just DON'T CARE.

>
I really don't think the people that voted for Bush have a feel for how the rest of the world views us and what Bush has done to that persona. I really cannot fathom that we have that many people that like him.
<

cause nobody here gives a crap what the rest of the world thinks, and even if people dont like him THEY RESPECT HIM... because he stands for what America stands for... because he has the balls to stand for what he believes is right and back up words with actions...

hes OUR PRESIDENT we elect him not the world... yes, he's the leader of the free world... the whole world... but there's a reason for that...

most of the worlds governments act like a bunch of petty stupid children anyway... the U.N. is full of cowards... they hate Bush because now they're exposed for being the money grubbing waste they are.

by the way i dont agree with a lot of things Bush does... but Kerry was not a better choice... and he would NEVER command the respect Bush does, he would be FAR LESS respected by the world.

Edit:
and as for the rest of the documents it all opinion based blllaaaahhhh... summed up as "a bunch of people are stupid and dont believe what we believe..."


Edit... am i in a bad mood and being an ******* or is it just me?

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 10:19 AM
> he would NEVER command the respect Bush does, he would be FAR LESS respected by the world.

Besides Tony Blair, who respects Bush, outside of the US?

edit: And I know you said opinion outside of the US doesn't matter, but that's a really myopic way to look at things. It's also a really WRONG way to look at things.

ober
02-02-2005, 10:25 AM
obviously no-one (no pun intended) ;)

Oh wait, you said outside of the US. Hmm... pun intended.

no-one
02-02-2005, 03:09 PM
> Besides Tony Blair, who respects Bush, outside of the US?

... who doesn't respect him? as i said they may hate him, but there's a difference... then again looking at its definition, respect doesn't even mean what it used to so... maybe i chose the wrong word...

>
edit: And I know you said opinion outside of the US doesn't matter, but that's a really myopic way to look at things. It's also a really WRONG way to look at things.
<

Depends on what viewpoint on things... things are as they are for a reason. He is the leader of the world for a reason.

The U.S. "leads" the world because no one else can, NO OTHER NATION IS WILLING TO PUT ASIDE THE BULL**** AND DO IT... no other nation can or is as willing to look as far outside its own interests to help others... period. and no other nation has the power, respect, influence, and independance we do... because the greatest majority of Americans feel the same way as our nation acts, we love our freedom, we are ecstatic to share it with ANY who ask, and we will defend it fiercly... we are willing to put aside any grudges any hate ANYTHING to help anyone... we are an open door, we help any people that wants/needs it, requardless enemy or not. and we are willing to listen to and respect even the tiniest of nations and not force ourselves on them.

now ask your self why? why do we hold those values?

also to any nit picky *******s no we arn't perfect yes we screw up A LOT, and do a lot of the wrong things, and dont do the right thing all the time... so stop even before you start. i dont care.

ober
02-02-2005, 03:57 PM
>> not force ourselves on them.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... good one. :)

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 04:11 PM
> ... who doesn't respect him? as i said they may hate him, but there's a difference...

I'm pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of world leaders who respect him.

> then again looking at its definition, respect doesn't even mean what it used to so... maybe i chose the wrong word...

Yeah, I remember the memo they sent out a few weeks ago when the definition of "respect" changed.

> He is the leader of the world for a reason.

Because 51% of the voting populace decided that they were afraid of some phantom enemy and that they also hate gay people. That doesn't mean he's a good leader.

> now ask your self why? why do we hold those values?

You've gotta be high. That's the only possible excuse.

B0bDole
02-02-2005, 04:49 PM
>edit: And I know you said opinion outside of the US doesn't matter, but that's a really myopic way to look at things. It's also a really WRONG way to look at things.

The US had this view circa 1900, but after the cuban war changed.... is it to say they were wrong to have this view, having this view isn't what caused the cuban war, I think the world would be better off if the US stayed out of other people's business....


edit: I'm too drunk to make sense... but I like opinions outside because somewhere in the world it is 5:00pm and i feel less of a lush.

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 04:54 PM
This isn't 1900, and the world is a lot different now. The US can't legitimately expect to be the strongest country in the world, be involved all over, and ignore the opinions of everyone else.

B0bDole
02-02-2005, 04:54 PM
>>> not force ourselves on them.

>>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... good one.

Actually he has a point, before 1900 every other world "power" country was trying to take over others and the USA is all about independence, thats the only difference between us and our eurpean ancestors

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 04:57 PM
It's a good thing it's before 1900.

no-one
02-02-2005, 06:24 PM
>
I'm pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of world leaders who respect him.
<

i never said anything about world leaders and i never ment them, im talking about the people. The worlds leaders are a bunch of ultra-liberal politicans(politician is about the worst most descriptive insult i can think of)...

>
Yeah, I remember the memo they sent out a few weeks ago when the definition of "respect" changed.
<

wippersnapper...

>
Because 51% of the voting populace decided that they were afraid of some phantom enemy and that they also hate gay people. That doesn't mean he's a good leader.
<

oh, im sorry i forgot 9/11 didn't happen and neither did the moon landing... wtf dude?
nobody i've ever heard of who isn't... something gay liking gayness... and most of them don't either... and most people they like their gay friends and hate the fact that their gay... and neither of these things are exactly relevant?

>You've gotta be high. That's the only possible excuse.

no sir... just ill, tired, in a horrible mood and a retarded...

>
This isn't 1900, and the world is a lot different now.
It's a good thing it's before 1900.
<

your missing his point...

>
The US can't legitimately expect to be the strongest country in the world, be involved all over, and ignore the opinions of everyone else.
<

We dont ignore them at all... we take them into account isn't that what i just said? what i was saying was who cares who they want us to elect for OUR president? he has a lot more jobs than wiping the U.N.'s ass... we elect the person we think will handle the job(including the world issues) without selling us out, and what not... no other nation has any care what happens to us or anything but their own interests at heart. So excuse me for not giving a crap what they want... this is all part of the greater point of what i said...

anyway Yes we can, in the immortal words of a Mr. Denis Leary "We got the bombs".

Edit to clarify what i meant by that quote, is this:
the U.S. can do whatever it wants, including ignore everybody, stomp on ANYBODY we want, and anything else that suited our whims, thats another reason other nations hate us... we are benevolent by choice.

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 06:40 PM
> i never said anything about world leaders and i never ment them, im talking about the people. The worlds leaders are a bunch of ultra-liberal politicans(politician is about the worst most descriptive insult i can think of)...

You're living in a fantasy world. Look at any of the polls to this effect, and you'll find that the majority of the world hates Bush.

> oh, im sorry i forgot 9/11 didn't happen and neither did the moon landing... wtf dude?

oh, i'm sorry i forgot we caught Osama and Saddam was also behind 9/11. Saddam also had a ton of WMD. Wait a minute, none of those things were true.

> nobody i've ever heard of who isn't... something gay liking gayness... and most of them don't either... and most people they like their gay friends and hate the fact that their gay... and neither of these things are exactly relevant?

I don't even know what the hell you're trying to say. Learn how to post a coherent thought.

> your missing his point...

No. The US is in an entirely different position than we were that long ago. If we're going to poke our noses into everything, we have to at least pay attention to world opinion of us.

no-one
02-02-2005, 07:04 PM
>You're living in a fantasy world. Look at any of the polls to this effect, and you'll find that the majority of the world hates Bush.

see first paragraph after the edit in my first post...

>oh, i'm sorry i forgot we caught Osama and Saddam was also behind 9/11. Saddam also had a ton of WMD. Wait a minute, none of those things were true.
<

um... lemmie see that means terrorists don't exist and 9/11 still never happened? furthermore... watch the news, they said they have documents linking Saddam to Al Qaeda, and though its unconfirmed there have been reports Saddam AT THE VERY LEAST knew about 9/11 before hand... it doesnt matter anyway...

He had the WMD's at some point PERIOD, he never disclosed what happened to them... just because we can't find them doesnt prove he didnt have them any more than it proves he did... you act like he never had them and explained everything... if he got rid of them or lost them, why didnt he just say so? problem SOLVED.

>I don't even know what the hell you're trying to say. Learn how to post a coherent thought.

its irrelevant anyway.

>
If we're going to poke our noses into everything, we have to at least pay attention to world opinion of us.
<

we do pay attention, doesn't mean the opinion is founded or legitimate, that its right and we're wrong, or that it has any more weight than our own views and opinions or that we can fix it OR that we should even give a crap, or we should do whatever they want so they will like us... they dont like Bush, so we shouldn't elect who we believe is best? you DONT elect the man because you like him or because the world likes him, you elect him because you believe he's the best for the job.

-KEN-
02-02-2005, 07:15 PM
I have heard unconfirmed reports that no-one is grossly mis-informed! READY THE TROOPS! LET'S ROLL!!

edit: Unlike Saddam and 9-11, I have personally confirmed these reports.

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 07:15 PM
> see first paragraph after the edit in my first post...

I see. So you say the vast majority of the world respects Bush, but you're going to say any poll that says otherwise is BS? OK, where's this information coming from?

> um... lemmie see that means terrorists don't exist and 9/11 still never happened?

Christ, you're dense. Terrorism is a phantom fear. That doesn't mean there's no such thing as terrorists, it means that Bush can justify anything he wants using terrorism as a boogeyman. Remember the mad rush to buy plastic sheeting and duct tape? How about the always rising and falling TERRORISMOMETER?

> they said they have documents linking Saddam to Al Qaeda

Yeah, they were documents that said alQaeda wanted money, but they were turned down. It seems you've found the smoking gun!

> though its unconfirmed there have been reports Saddam AT THE VERY LEAST knew about 9/11 before hand..

It's unconfirmed but there have been reports the moon is made of cheese. Doesn't make it so. You might feel comfortable going to war on unconfirmed reports just because they say what you want to hear, but I'm not.

> just because we can't find them doesnt prove he didnt have them any more than it proves he did...

You're asking me to prove a negative here. That's not possible. The point stands that the UN inspectors combed that country for a long time, and our soldiers have combed it since, and have found absolutely positively jack squat. None of those "mobile WMD labs" or stockpiles have come to fruition. NONE.

> you elect him because you believe he's the best for the job.

What I'm saying is maybe the people that aren't jingoistic morons like yourself may have a different perspective, and you should at least pay attention to that. By saying that the world respects Bush, it's obvious you're not.

jverkoey
02-02-2005, 07:48 PM
Personally, in my own experiences, I don't know of a single person who respects Bush, and I know a lot of people around the world because I move a lot (about once a year) and have met numerous people.

Also, I found it really interesting that all of the states that voted a majority for Bush tended to have some of the lowest IQs in the country....oh wait, that's a poll, it must be false.

Hmm..let's see. Facing that logic. What is a poll?



A survey of the public or of a sample of public opinion to acquire information.
The casting and registering of votes in an election.


Hmm...so based on that definition, a poll is basically the same thing as an election....does that mean...*gasp* that maybe Bush's election could've been faked/screwed with somehow :eek: :eek: :eek:

But seriously, the states in itself is just like crazy catholics, bossing around to everyone, regardless if they want to be "saved" or not, and forcing their own beliefs on them.

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 07:54 PM
> Also, I found it really interesting that all of the states that voted a majority for Bush tended to have some of the lowest IQs in the country....oh wait, that's a poll, it must be false.

Actually, I'm pretty sure most of those were actually bogus. IQ is a stupid indicator, anyways. It is interesting most of the states that voted for Bush have virtually no chance of terrorist attack. I believe DC voted Kerry something like 9:1 and New York was 3 or 4:1.

jverkoey
02-02-2005, 08:02 PM
Hmm, well, I still find it interesting that no-one claims all polls are faked and biased completely.

To quote more accurately:


this is just propaganda, opinion poll's are bullI am sillyI am sillyI am sillyI am silly and always will be

Govtcheez
02-02-2005, 08:04 PM
That's because they don't support his claim at all.

no-one
02-02-2005, 08:37 PM
wow... this is the best you guys got?...

>
I see. So you say the vast majority of the world respects Bush, but you're going to say any poll that says otherwise is BS? OK, where's this information coming from?
>
Also, I found it really interesting that all of the states that voted a majority for Bush tended to have some of the lowest IQs in the country....oh wait, that's a poll, it must be false.

Hmm..let's see. Facing that logic. What is a poll?
>
Hmm, well, I still find it interesting that no-one claims all polls are faked and biased completely
>
That's because they don't support his claim at all.
<

...no i said opinion polls are BULL........ easily scewed slanted controlled etc... NO MATTER WHAT OPINION THE PROMOTE. THEY PROVE NOTHING i really dont remember saying they had to agree with me to be right?

>
Christ, you're dense. Terrorism is a phantom fear. That doesn't mean there's no such thing as terrorists, it means that Bush can justify anything he wants using terrorism as a boogeyman
<

well maybe when you phrase what you said differently, you might mean that... but thats not what you said... or implied.

>Remember the mad rush to buy plastic sheeting and duct tape? How about the always rising and falling TERRORISMOMETER?
<

so Bush is responsible for idiots and people overreacting now too?

>
It's unconfirmed but there have been reports the moon is made of cheese. Doesn't make it so.
<

well since We landed on the moon such things are no longer confirmable...

> You might feel comfortable going to war on unconfirmed reports just because they say what you want to hear, but I'm not.
<

did i say that?

>he point stands that the UN inspectors combed that country for a long time, and our soldiers have combed it since, and have found absolutely positively jack squat. None of those "mobile WMD labs" or stockpiles have come to fruition. NONE.
<

you miss my point...

>What I'm saying is maybe the people that aren't jingoistic morons like yourself may have a different perspective, and you should at least pay attention to that. By saying that the world respects Bush, it's obvious you're not.<

take your own advice...

>
Personally, in my own experiences, I don't know of a single person who respects Bush, and I know a lot of people around the world because I move a lot (about once a year) and have met numerous people.
<

good for you, cause your liberal aquaintances speak for the world.

>Also, I found it really interesting that all of the states that voted a majority for Bush tended to have some of the lowest IQs in the country....oh wait, that's a poll, it must be false.
<

well that was pointless... and the most assanine thing i've ever heard... anyone who supports bush has got to be retarded, because they dont agree with me mommy...

>Hmm...so based on that definition, a poll is basically the same thing as an election....does that mean...*gasp* that maybe Bush's election could've been faked/screwed with somehow
<

well if you are completely stupid and if your trying to be an .............. on top of it, sure.

>
But seriously, the states in itself is just like crazy catholics, bossing around to everyone, regardless if they want to be "saved" or not, and forcing their own beliefs on them.
<

WOW...

>Hmm, well, I still find it interesting that no-one claims all polls are faked and biased completely.

did i say that?

EDIT: apparently legitimate discussion here is at its end, so... i think im done here...

Zach L.
02-02-2005, 08:52 PM
I've heard some interesting arguments for Bush. None of them I agree with (often for ideological reasons), but this one is simply inarticulate, ill-supported, and generally nonsensical. no-one, you could make a case for your point of view, but you are significantly failing to do so now.

Cheers

ober
02-02-2005, 09:04 PM
no-one, you're either high or drunk or both. You're really off base and you are sounding more and more uninformed with every post you make.

I agree with the last part of your last statement.

no-one
02-02-2005, 09:12 PM
who says i'm arguing for bush?

besides that i dont even care... none of you listen or even attempted to understand anything i said beyond what suited you... i mean damn we're barely even on the same topic as we started on... my arguements are no more "inarticulate, ill-supported, and generally nonsensical" than theirs... they're just cheap shoting now, and taking what i said out of context and twisting what i say so they can... jumping around its pointlessly stupid... they have nothing to argue... not even worth the time to "rebutt" properly...

>You're really off base and you are sounding more and more uninformed with every post you make.

uninformed about what? what i didn't say, what the hell...

>no-one, you're either high or drunk or both

no neither... but i will concede that i am in no means in my right mind.... and drop it here...

i mean there's not even a god damned argument to support anymore because their not even talking about anything ........ing relevant to ANY arguement?

Hunter2
02-02-2005, 10:25 PM
>>watch the news
Haaha, y'know, I just caught that now. I find it ironic that you take the NEWS as truth and call opinion polls bull? The news (especially in America) is about the most biased report you'll ever get, very simply because anyone who says the SLIGHTEST thing against Bush gets fired in short order. I won't vouch for the accuracy of opinion polls either, but they are as a whole usually quite close to the truth. Take a cross-section of the forums here, for example; nobody here is for Bush, but we've got at least 5 people against. Assuming CProg represents a passable cross-section of North America as well as (to a lesser degree) other parts of the world, you simply cannot say that the polls stating opinion stacked against Bush are completely false.

>>who says i'm arguing for bush?
You do?.. Or at least you're clearly supporting him. If there's a distinction.

>>uninformed about what? what i didn't say, what the hell...
Exactly. You have not said a single thing that adds support for Bush.

>>they're just cheap shoting now, and taking what i said out of context and twisting what i say so they can
Let's analyze where this conversation fell off from.
Govtcheez: Rebutts most of previous arguments in a logical and articulate manner.
JVerkoey: "I've met lots of people around the world, and nobody respects Bush."
Others: Partially derail the thread.
no-one: Restates point about opinion polls being bull. Starts making short comments like "did i say that?" "take your own advice.." "go cry to your mommy"

Really, if you had just expanded your responses to clearly and coherently communicate your points rather than offering astonished interjections that pursue no apparent end, it is likely that the 'discussion' would still retain some semblance of intellect.

no-one
02-02-2005, 10:40 PM
>very simply because anyone who says the SLIGHTEST thing against Bush gets fired in short order.

HAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! you need to watch more American TV. and less tabloids...

>You do?.. Or at least you're clearly supporting him. If there's a distinction.
>Exactly. You have not said a single thing that adds support for Bush.

hey, im just anti-bull.........

>Let's analyze where this conversation fell off from.

lets be totally unobjective and ignore anything relevant...

>
Really, if you had just expanded your responses to clearly and coherently communicate your points rather than offering astonished interjections that pursue no apparent end, it is likely that the 'discussion' would still retain some semblance of intellect.
<

maybe if any one of you listen to anything anybody said...

axon
02-02-2005, 10:46 PM
>>The news (especially in America) is about the most biased report you'll ever get, very simply because anyone who says the SLIGHTEST thing against Bush gets fired in short order.<<

Oh man... no-one's argument is horrible, but this statement is false beyond belief. On the ride home today from school I heard Bush getting slammed by the reporters on NPR about 10 times. On "music" radio stations DJs flame Bush all the time - I don't listen to Stern but I'm sure he does it too. I don't watch much TV, so I can't say anything definitive, but I'm pretty sure it's the same story.

edit:: no-one, you should stop immiediately, you're giving "middle-of-the-road-but-facing-slightly-right" people like me a bad rap. So please, quit it dude.

Zach L.
02-02-2005, 10:51 PM
no-one -- I apparently did misinterpret your posts. Perhaps you are arguing for Bush, perhaps you are arguing for jingoism, perhaps you are arguing to save the whales. What you have said is not clear. No one else is doing anything but trying to refute what you said (or what they think you said), so it isn't clear either. If you presented an argument, then perhaps a coherent discussion could be had.

novacain
02-03-2005, 12:31 AM
Let me guess no-one you watch FOX.....(definately not PBS)

>>The news (especially in America) is about the most biased report you'll ever get, very simply because anyone who says the SLIGHTEST thing against Bush gets fired in short order.<<

Only certain stations (read this http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/I...2_03_Report.pdf pg 12)
they tested what misperceptions viewers had...

"the beliefs that evidence of links between Iraq and al-Qaeda have been found,
that WMD have been found in Iraq
and that world public opinion approved of the US going to war with Iraq."

eg pg 13
the beliefs that evidence of links between Iraq and al-Qaeda have been found
FOX viewers ave. 67% had misperceptions
....
NPR-PBS viewers ave. 16% had misperceptions

Remember FOX spent years in court (fighting former employees FOX sacked for not altering a bad report on Monsanto) that it did not have to obey FCC regulations (to report the news fairly) and WON!
Yet CBS(?) got fined US$550,000 by the FCC for allowing Janet Jacksons boob on TV.

>>the U.S. can do whatever it wants, including ignore everybody, stomp on ANYBODY we want, and anything else that suited our whims, thats another reason other nations hate us...<<

Sure. Just remember this will cause people to do bad things to the US and its citizens (ie S11)

cgod
02-03-2005, 12:51 AM
Please who cares what the europeans think, look what they did when they were the world superpower's the world was taken over.Its not a popularity contest i doubt you will find to many superpowers that were "loved" in the world because they have to do all the dirty work.If i was american i would vote for bush anyday (im australian)

novacain
02-03-2005, 01:02 AM
>>who cares what the europeans think

Microsoft for a start. US$5mill/day fine seems gets even Bill's attention.

>>If i was american i would vote for bush anyday (im australian)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! say its not so......

Govtcheez
02-03-2005, 05:16 AM
Remember FOX spent years in court (fighting former employees FOX sacked for not altering a bad report on Monsanto) that it did not have to obey FCC regulations (to report the news fairly) and WON!
Yet CBS(?) got fined US$550,000 by the FCC for allowing Janet Jacksons boob on TV.Fox News is a cable organization and is not governed by FCC rules. They could say whatever they wanted and get away with it. CBS isn't.

The news (especially in America) is about the most biased report you'll ever get, very simply because anyone who says the SLIGHTEST thing against Bush gets fired in short order.As was pointed out, this is just wrong.

no-one - There's no point in replying to your posts; you haven't attempted to debate any of the points that have been brought up at all. You've relied on the "You're wrong because I know something but I won't tell you what it is but you're wrong and you're wrong" school of debating this whole time. Grow up, if you want to be taken seriously.

Zach L.
02-03-2005, 07:02 AM
If i was american i would vote for bush anyday (im australian)
But by your own reasoning, we should ignore your opinion too.

no-one
02-03-2005, 01:19 PM
i guess this is what i get for argueing with a bunch of liberals... always the same when you argue with them... they're never arguing the point... they argue the person... WOO you rock!

>
Sure. Just remember this will cause people to do bad things to the US and its citizens (ie S11)
<

if you take it totally out of context sure thing... but if you take what i said in the context it was said, no way in hell...

>
no-one - There's no point in replying to your posts; you haven't attempted to debate any of the points that have been brought up at all. You've relied on the "You're wrong because I know something but I won't tell you what it is but you're wrong and you're wrong" school of debating this whole time. Grow up, if you want to be taken seriously.
<

... maybe you should try reading what i say... and maybe try arguing on point... and maybe try actually responding to whats said instead of whatever nonsense you can pull out of your asses...

i dont care... this is a total waste of time...

Hunter2
02-03-2005, 06:08 PM
>>As was pointed out, this is just wrong.
My mistake then, it was the distinct impression I was getting. Perhaps I'll do a little more research before the next time I post.


i guess this is what i get for argueing with a bunch of liberals... always the same when you argue with them... they're never arguing the point... they argue the person... WOO you rock!Well, you're doing the same thing. People have refuted your arguments, and you haven't said a thing in reply other than "well in context I'm right".


if you take it totally out of context sure thing... but if you take what i said in the context it was said, no way in hell...I don't see what context you're speaking of.
the U.S. can do whatever it wants, including ignore everybody, stomp on ANYBODY we want, and anything else that suited our whims, thats another reason other nations hate us... we are benevolent by choice.
Sure. Just remember this will cause people to do bad things to the US and its citizensNovacain's point is very relevant; if the US decides to go and stomp on people then people will rise up and stomp back - perhaps on the US's toes only, but it will hurt enough to make the gain less than the effort. Therefore the US is not 'benevolent' by choice, but because it is unwise to act otherwise. And besides, nations respect nations that are truly benevolent (i.e. act in the interest of other nations without stepping on others' toes); if the US is hated for their 'benevolence', then obviously it isn't benevolent.

Govtcheez
02-03-2005, 06:28 PM
> ... maybe you should try reading what i say... and maybe try arguing on point... and maybe try actually responding to whats said instead of whatever nonsense you can pull out of your asses...

I have argued the point, which you just keep sidestepping by say "you missed my point but i'm not going to explain it anymore" and "omg all liberals are all the same". If I was attacking you, you'd know it. Rebut one of the points I've made so far. I dare you.

no-one
02-03-2005, 07:25 PM
>Novacain's point is very relevant;

quite right, i missed what he was saying i missed that he was citing the entire paragraph and not just the quoted part... my apologies.

> if the US decides to go and stomp on people then people will rise up and stomp back - perhaps on the US's toes only, but it will hurt enough to make the gain less than the effort. Therefore the US is not 'benevolent' by choice, but because it is unwise to act otherwise. And besides, nations respect nations that are truly benevolent (i.e. act in the interest of other nations without stepping on others' toes); if the US is hated for their 'benevolence', then obviously it isn't benevolent.
<

this is a cyclic hypothetical argument that is entirely aside from the point i was trying to make so... whatever... for explaination GOVT. its the same as the old "My dad could beat up your dad." its aside the point and a waste of time... so why waste my time?

>"omg all liberals are all the same".

your absolutely right... i should have said politicians... doesnt matter liberal or conservative...

>Rebut one of the points I've made so far. I dare you.

now this is just getting silly... i have... and nothing you've said is any less opinion than anything i've said, we're arguing opinions... or your take/belief versus mine... you think by tag teaming me you will make yourselves more legitimate and the facts less than they are?
just because there are like five of you claiming your opinion is more valid than mine, that means yours is fact, im high, stupid, inept, indignent, and anything i've said valid or not can be ignored? im done here... the lot of you can ........ off.

Govtcheez
02-04-2005, 05:36 AM
> now this is just getting silly... i have...

Where?

> and nothing you've said is any less opinion than anything i've said, we're arguing opinions... or your take/belief versus mine...

Except that your argument's been pretty much exclusively opinions, whereas I've had facts backing up most of mine. Just because you're ignoring them doesn't mean they're not there.

Let's do a quick rundown of my arguments:
-Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. This is a FACT and is backed up by the findings of the 9/11 commision
-Saddam had only a tenuous connection with al-Qaeda. Again, according to the 9/11 commision, the only connection they had was when OBL asked Saddam for money and was turned down
-Saddam had no giant stockpiles of WMDs, as we were promised before going to war. This is pretty obvious - the UN inspectors didn't find any, our soldiers didn't find any, no one's found any.
-Most of the people voting for Bush voted either based on their dislike of gay people ("moral values") or their fear of brown people ("terrorism"). This is partially opinion, but is backed strongly by polls of Bush voters
-The majority of Bush voters live in places that have almost no chance of being attacked by terrorists. Pretty much all big cities went overwhelmingly to Kerry. You can examine any election results map to see this.
-Polls throughout the world say that people don't respect Bush. You insist that the polls say the opposite, while decrying them as worthless in the same breath. Look at any of the polls. You're wrong.

There are many conservative people I've debated with who have either made me re-examine or change my views. You are not one of those, because you're just spouting the same tired crap I could see on Fox News 7 nights a week.

no-one
02-04-2005, 10:51 AM
>Where?

apparently we're reading different threads... or your blind or something...

>Except that your argument's been pretty much exclusively opinions, whereas I've had facts backing up most of mine. Just because you're ignoring them doesn't mean they're not there.
<

... mhmmm....

>Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. This is a FACT and is backed up by the findings of the 9/11 commision

no its not, from what i heard of it there are many indications he knew about it before hand... as i said its as yet UNCONFIRMED. ie. not enough evidence to prove it, as i said... and as i also said its irrelevant to the freaking discussion, so i dont give a crap... and i'm not going into it .......... all you want...

>Saddam had only a tenuous connection with al-Qaeda. Again, according to the 9/11 commision, the only connection they had was when OBL asked Saddam for money and was turned down

not what i heard... they were talking all the time... among other things i can't remember at the moment, again this is irrelevant to the discussion... so i dont care...

>-Saddam had no giant stockpiles of WMDs, as we were promised before going to war. This is pretty obvious - the UN inspectors didn't find any, our soldiers didn't find any, no one's found any.

YES he did, nobody can deny he had them uness your a conspiracy idiot, that much crap doesn't just vanish, what the hell did he do with them? i remember hearing they found small amounts of chemical weapons somewhere... and they've found equipment for them... that was well maintained... he was also required to account for those weapons as well in the resolution, he failed to do so, among many other things... again this is IRRELEVANT... so I DO NOT CARE.

besides if this is what your talking about, i totally agree they should have found them, or should have been able to before the war.

>
Most of the people voting for Bush voted either based on their dislike of gay people ("moral values") or their fear of brown people ("terrorism").
<

this is ........ing bull........... i think it was 70% of people on average voted againts gay marrige if thats what you mean, as i recall he got only 51 or 52% of the vote... so your "opinion" is not founded in the slightest... and homsexuality is not the only moral value.... other moral values im sure played a larger part such as abortion.

>This is partially opinion, but is backed strongly by polls of Bush voters

its not backed at all its ALL conjecture and opinion... i didn't vote for him for EITHER reason, or just one or both of those... and i doubt many did... just cause they voted for other "conservative" things doesnt mean thats why they elected bush, its bull........ speculation.

>
The majority of Bush voters live in places that have almost no chance of being attacked by terrorists. Pretty much all big cities went overwhelmingly to Kerry. You can examine any election results map to see this.
<

your point? how is this relevant? why does it matter?
is it that you think they have no right to vote if their not directly threatened? so only people in new york can vote for anyone based on the threat of terror? only people in new york can care, or worry about it, or other people or family anywhere in the world?

thats just an idiotic thing to say...

damn and who are you to say what their targets are going to be? do you have any idea how terrorist operate? im assuming not.

>
Polls throughout the world say that people don't respect Bush. You insist that the polls say the opposite, while decrying them as worthless in the same breath. Look at any of the polls. You're wrong.
<

tell me where i said i the polls say the opposite? POINT IT OUT I MUST HAVE MISSED ME SAYING THAT... i said OPINION POLLS ARE BULL......... PERIOD. thats it and thats all... shut up.

>
There are many conservative people I've debated with who have either made me re-examine or change my views. You are not one of those, because you're just spouting the same tired crap I could see on Fox News 7 nights a week.
<

i dont give a crap... you cant even argue the topic, you have nothing to say and no points to make so you go off on some tanget thats totally irrelevant to the discussion and cry like a brat and insult me when i dont play you stupid games... i've answered your points twice now... and your still not gonna be ........ing happy because its not what you want... so you all can go to hell...

Fordy
02-04-2005, 11:06 AM
I think this is getting out of hand and I'd rather it close before we all upset each other.

CLOSED