RON PAUL: get out of wars and stop claiming youre responsible for cutting BS

[QUOTE="fidosim"]

By no means is the Taliban gone, and we can still lose. The outcome of the war is really out of hands at this point - if the Afghan government remains as corrupt as it is and if Pakistan doesn't shift it's focus from India to the Taliban we will lose. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

A Pell-grant receiving college kid does not have the "statistics" as to why there is such difficulty for U.S. and NATO forces to accomplish their objectives. Unless, of course, you attend regular military briefings in-theater.

moneymatterz

Dont know why people on GS have to use personal attacks. Not to mention false ones:

[QUOTE="aransom"]

What's wrong with paying for your own higher education?

DroidPhysX

I do.:| In full.:roll:

Funding doesnt pay for your tutition. It helps the university fund its programs. And what happens when you cut off funding, guess whos tuition goes up?

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27609338/my-state-governor-is-cutting-funding-for-higher-education.-big-business-rejoice&msg_id=328598564#328598564

Dont know why people on GS have to use personal attacks. Not to mention false ones:DroidPhysX

He seems to think the personal attacks make his argument stronger.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27609338/my-state-governor-is-cutting-funding-for-higher-education.-big-business-rejoice&msg_id=328598564#328598564

DroidPhysX

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27609338/my-state-governor-is-cutting-funding-for-higher-education.-big-business-rejoice&msg_id=328598564#328598564

Saturos3091

That wasnt the point of the post. It was a link to the part where I stated I pay for my tuition.

EDIT: I started paying in full in this semister. I only had a pell grant for only last semister.

That wasnt the point of the post. It was a link to the part where I stated I pay for my tuition.

DroidPhysX

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Dont know why people on GS have to use personal attacks. Not to mention false ones:

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="aransom"]

What's wrong with paying for your own higher education?

DroidPhysX

I do.:| In full.:roll:

Funding doesnt pay for your tutition. It helps the university fund its programs. And what happens when you cut off funding, guess whos tuition goes up?

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27609338/my-state-governor-is-cutting-funding-for-higher-education.-big-business-rejoice&msg_id=328598564#328598564

I don't see why me stating the fact that you leeched off governent handouts is viewed as a personal attack? Are you embarrased by it? That could be the reason why you may have thought it was an attack. The purpose of my mentioning that fact was to point out your lack of perspective.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

I do.:| In full.:roll:

Funding doesnt pay for your tutition. It helps the university fund its programs. And what happens when you cut off funding, guess whos tuition goes up?

moneymatterz

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27609338/my-state-governor-is-cutting-funding-for-higher-education.-big-business-rejoice&msg_id=328598564#328598564

I don't see why me stating the fact that you leeched off governent handouts is viewed as a personal attack? Are you embarrased by it? That could be the reason why you may have thought it was an attack. The purpose of my mentioning that fact was to point out your lack of perspective.

No, it's a personal attack because a) it has nothing do with the topic and b) he clearly stated that he pays for his own tuition. So basically you are slandering him.

You should cut it out.

What he just said isn't some "oh my god why hasn't anyone thougt of this before? Ron Paul is a visionary, RP2012!", he's really just saying what most people have been saying over the past couple of years. The US's military budget is just... ridiculous to say the least. Glad to see the republicans coming on board with getting out of Afghanistan, so we won't have to cut 83% of education and nearly none of the defense budget like our dear Ron's son proposed.

@GreySeal - I just told you what my mentioning of his leeching has to do with the topic. It points out his lack of perspective, as mentioned previously, in regard to why there is such difficulty for armed forces on the ground in Afghanistan. Did you skip that part?

Also . . .

[QUOTE="Saturos3091"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

DroidPhysX

That wasnt the point of the post. It was a link to the part where I stated I pay for my tuition.

EDIT: I started paying in full in this semister. I only had a pell grant for only last semister.

I don't really like agreeing with Ron Paul. But then again he's really just saying what most people have been saying over the past couple of years. The US's military budget is just... ridiculous to say the least. Glad to see the republicans coming on board with getting out of Afghanistan, so we won't have to cut 83% of education and nearly none of the defense budget like our dear Ron's son proposed.

Mr_Alexander

I absolutely agree with Ron Paul, damn I wish he would've been elected instead of Obama, we really would have seen "change" then!

I just told you what my mentioning of his leeching has to do with the topic. It points out his lack of perspective, as mentioned previously, in regard to why there is such difficulty for armed forces on the ground in Afghanistan. Did you skip that part?moneymatterz

It really has nothing to do with the topic.

It's nothing more than an ad hominem. Basically, you're attacking him as a way of disregarding his argument.

You can try to dress it up all you like, but it's really just a cheap debate tactic.

[QUOTE="Mr_Alexander"]

I don't really like agreeing with Ron Paul. But then again he's really just saying what most people have been saying over the past couple of years. The US's military budget is just... ridiculous to say the least. Glad to see the republicans coming on board with getting out of Afghanistan, so we won't have to cut 83% of education and nearly none of the defense budget like our dear Ron's son proposed.

surrealnumber5

You act like his stances are hard to attack or something. His stances are pure idealism.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]I just told you what my mentioning of his leeching has to do with the topic. It points out his lack of perspective, as mentioned previously, in regard to why there is such difficulty for armed forces on the ground in Afghanistan. Did you skip that part?GreySeal9

It really has nothing to do with the topic.

It's nothing more than an ad hominem. Basically, you're attacking him as a way of disregarding his argument.

You can try to dress it up all you like, but it's really just a cheap debate tactic.

You must skilled with a paintbrush, because you are illustrating an entirely false picture.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="Mr_Alexander"]

I don't really like agreeing with Ron Paul. But then again he's really just saying what most people have been saying over the past couple of years. The US's military budget is just... ridiculous to say the least. Glad to see the republicans coming on board with getting out of Afghanistan, so we won't have to cut 83% of education and nearly none of the defense budget like our dear Ron's son proposed.

GreySeal9

You act like his stances are hard to attack or something. His stances are pure idealism.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]I just told you what my mentioning of his leeching has to do with the topic. It points out his lack of perspective, as mentioned previously, in regard to why there is such difficulty for armed forces on the ground in Afghanistan. Did you skip that part?moneymatterz

It really has nothing to do with the topic.

It's nothing more than an ad hominem. Basically, you're attacking him as a way of disregarding his argument.

You can try to dress it up all you like, but it's really just a cheap debate tactic.

You must skilled with a paintbrush, because you are illustrating an entirely false picture.

Nope. Your post was a classic ad hominem.

Notice how you didn't actually take apart his argument.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]I just told you what my mentioning of his leeching has to do with the topic. It points out his lack of perspective, as mentioned previously, in regard to why there is such difficulty for armed forces on the ground in Afghanistan. Did you skip that part?GreySeal9

It really has nothing to do with the topic.

It's nothing more than an ad hominem. Basically, you're attacking him as a way of disregarding his argument.

You can try to dress it up all you like, but it's really just a cheap debate tactic.

You must skilled with a paintbrush, because you are illustrating an entirely false picture.

Nope. Your post was a classic ad hominem.

Notice how you didn't actually take apart his argument.

What, exactly, was that argument? He stated that he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty. Not much to work with . . .

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] he has been against the war from the start, there has been no change in his position let alone the rest of the republican party. ron paul has a lot of bad press around him but it is based on personal attacks and not his stances. surrealnumber5

You act like his stances are hard to attack or something. His stances are pure idealism.

I give him credit where it is due. He's more honest than most and he's consistent. But his stances are pretty unrealistic. And he lacks the ability to step outside of his hardline ideology.

What, exactly, was that argument? He stated that he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty. Not much to work with . . .

moneymatterz

It doesn't matter what the argument was. And there was certainly enough for you to refute, but it seems that you didn't want to put forth the effort.

His personal details are not relevant.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You act like his stances are hard to attack or something. His stances are pure idealism.

GreySeal9

I give him credit where it is due. He's more honest than most and he's consistent. But his stances are pretty unrealistic. And he lacks the ability to step outside of his hardline ideology.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]What, exactly, was that argument? He stated that he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty. Not much to work with . . .

GreySeal9

It doesn't matter what the argument was. And there was certainly enough for you to refute, but it seems that you didn't want to put forth the effort.

His personal details are not relevant.

Ha ha. When I point out the error of your own statements you turn the other cheek and say "oh it didn't matter." This only highlights your lack of reading comprehension, or maybe it is better characterized as blatant disregard.

His entire post consisted of a single statement expressing how he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty on the ground. You call that an argument? I call it hate-filled drivle.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]What, exactly, was that argument? He stated that he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty. Not much to work with . . .

moneymatterz

It doesn't matter what the argument was. And there was certainly enough for you to refute, but it seems that you didn't want to put forth the effort.

His personal details are not relevant.

Ha ha. When I point out the error of your own statements you turn the other cheek and say "oh it didn't matter." This only highlights your lack of reading comprehension, or maybe it is better characterized as blatant disregard.

His entire post consisted of a single statement expressing how he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty on the ground. You call that an argument? I call it hate-filled drivle.

You didn't point out an error because there was no error. It literally does not matter what his particular argument was. What matters is that your personal attack was not relevant and was an ad hominem. You can try to make it relevant all you want, but I know better.

If his argument is hate-filled drivel, why do you feel the need to use ad hominems? Why not just shut the hate-filled drivel down?

Also, a single statement can be an argument.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Ha ha. When I point out the error of your own statements you turn the other cheek and say "oh it didn't matter." This only highlights your lack of reading comprehension, or maybe it is better characterized as blatant disregard.

His entire post consisted of a single statement expressing how he did not know why a bunch of mountainmen were causing our armed forces so much difficulty on the ground. You call that an argument? I call it hate-filled drivle.

moneymatterz

You didn't point out an error because there was no error. It literally does not matter what his particular argument was. What matters is that your personal attack was not relevant and was an ad hominem. You can try to make it relevant all you want, but I know better.

If his argument is hate-filled drivel, why do you feel the need to use ad hominems? Why not just shut the hate-filled drivel down?

Also, a single statement can be an argument.

Listen here, cupcake. Since you have the most insatiable desire to always get the last word, I'll let you do just that, because circle-jerkin' around with you no longer holds my interest. Toodles!

:lol: Cupcake? Is that supposed to make you sound like an internet tough guy or something?

Anyway, I'm glad you've decided to stop defending your logical fallacy.