Stavrogin_'s forum posts

Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts

[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Never was I discussing different interpretations of the event with you. If you were arguing that...then you were not arguing what I asked you. I asked if they had a reason to attack Toronto. And all I got in response was the reason was trivial or absurd. That is a personal judgment. That does not answer my question. So I guess what this discussion came down to in the end....was (reading your last paragraph quoted) your straw man to deflect the question I asked you in regard to the analogy.

LJS9502_basic

Man, you're like a little kid. I explained the bolded part. Your opinion doesn't matter because it's outside the point, the point is they had a different reason. Not that opinions don't matter, jeezzzz...

And there is the contradiction I'm talking about...you should not have said the reason in my analogy was absurd. Because it's outside the point. The point had a different reason. Get it now?

Your analogy is absurd because you comparing it with a problem that carries much less weight. Attempting to control an entire region with border control.

Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Stavrogin_"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] We were never arguing that line.....can you grasp that? I asked you a simple question using Canada as an example since as far as I know Canada has no enemies. And you responded with a contradiction.

Your analogy is and remains a logical fallacy that i only answered for the sake of argument. Yet you claimed that i subjectively give no value to examples i disagree with, come on, please google an explanation. Goodbye, this one is for real :P

No it's not a logical fallacy. It's taking your idea that a group can disagree with a government and they have a reason to advance terrorist activities. You did say the terrorists acted because they didn't like US policy...did you not?

Yes, and this is outside the point. My point was and still is, for the hundredth time, they had a different reason, whether you think it's legitimate or not is not important because it is outside the point, point was the reason for the attacks were different. Not that opinions don't matter. How many times do i have to repeat myself until you finally understand?
Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts

And I bolded the contradiction I found.... [QUOTE="Stavrogin_"] [QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Terrorists have historically entered the US through those borders. That is not trivial. LJS9502_basic

Why are you so stubborn? The point i am trying to make is very simple.

1. Person thinks the attacks were totally unprovoked.

2. They were not unprovoked, they had a reason.

3. Whether you think that reason is legitimate is not important, point is they HAD a reason

. The same goes with your trivial analogy, if a terrorist organization attacked Toronto because of the borders and a person thinks that they attacked them because of hate or jealousy i would correct them too by saying "no they attacked you because you didn't want to close your borders". THAT is the point i was trying to make. And yes, comparing border control with attempting to control an entire region is pretty falacious.

Never was I discussing different interpretations of the event with you. If you were arguing that...then you were not arguing what I asked you. I asked if they had a reason to attack Toronto. And all I got in response was the reason was trivial or absurd. That is a personal judgment. That does not answer my question. So I guess what this discussion came down to in the end....was (reading your last paragraph quoted) your straw man to deflect the question I asked you in regard to the analogy.

Man, you're like a little kid. I explained the bolded part. Your opinion doesn't matter because it's outside the point, the point is they had a different reason. Not that opinions don't matter, jeezzzz...
Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts
You seem to have a hard time grasping simple concepts. Here's my point, the reason Al Qaeda attacked the US is different than the one some people think it is. Whether you think the real reason is still valid or not is not important NOT because opinions are not important but because they're outside my point. My point was i remind you again, the reason the Al Qaeda attacked the US is different than the one perceived by some people. How old are you exactly?
Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts

[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] No. That is not quote mining. I asked that question of you and you answered as the thread evolved. Period. That started that line of discussion.LJS9502_basic

You based your arguments on quote-mining me, i never said yours or anyone's personal opinions don't matter i said personal opinions don't influence the point i was making.

No I didn't. That was your total response.

It's an absurd analogy when you compare it with a trivial thing.Stavrogin_

How is that quote mining? Either we accept that people have reasons for what they do...or we do not. You cannot have it both ways. You can check back and see that that was the entirety of your post if you like.

You just shot yourself in the foot. Yes, and then you claimed that i said opinions don't matter and yet i used my subjective opinion to decide what's trivial or not, when it wasn't like that. I never said opinions don't matter, i said opinions don't influence the point i was making. How is that not quote-mining?

Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts

[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Yes because when one doesn't want to answer in such a way as to make their earlier statements show an error....a fallacy is always the reason. Seriously dude. You have not once explained why my rationale that another group being angry at the Canadian government is in anyway inferior as an reason. But I'm glad we've finished. The quote thread can be judged from others.

LJS9502_basic

You are basing this response on a previous quote-mining, i said personal opinions don't influence the point i was making and that is the reason for the attacks is different then the one perceived by some people on the forum. It's that simple, don't know why you're being so stubborn.

No. That is not quote mining. I asked that question of you and you answered as the thread evolved. Period. That started that line of discussion.

You based your arguments on quote-mining me, i never said yours or anyone's personal opinions don't matter i said personal opinions don't influence the point i was making because they're completely outside the point.

Avatar image for Stavrogin_
Stavrogin_

804

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Stavrogin_
Member since 2011 • 804 Posts

[QUOTE="Stavrogin_"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] So then the reaons is only valid if you agree with it? That sir is a contradiction. I'm sure that is on Wiki as well.

LJS9502_basic

You should really really read an article about that logical fallacy you enjoy making. I'm done here, bye...

Yes because when one doesn't want to answer in such a way as to make their earlier statements show an error....a fallacy is always the reason. Seriously dude. You have not once explained why my rationale that another group being angry at the Canadian government is in anyway inferior as an reason. But I'm glad we've finished. The quote thread can be judged from others.

You are basing this response on a previous quote-mining, i said personal opinions don't influence the point i was making and that the the reason for the attacks is different then the one perceived by some people on the forum. It's that simple, don't know why you're being so stubborn.