Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (407018)	8/15/2008 11:17:46 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574849

"Well, of course I consider appeals to authority. That's the entire basis of most arguments, and what each of you conveniently overlooks." As I have pointed out to Tenchu, google fallacious arguments. Just claiming that experts have that view, without actually supporting that, is an intellectually dishonest argument. Which was my point. "Very little of my complaint against Obama has been "innuendo"." To the contrary. Almost all of it is based on inflammatory language and supposition. "Actually, my only position about terrorism since 9/11 is that it has declined where it matters, in the United States. We haven't had another successful attack since 9/11. " Not exactly. You generally start off with the statement that terrorism has declined. And this is indisputable. When it is proven you are full of hot air, you claim you meant by al Qaida and that is indisputable. When that is proven to be counter-factual, you then move on to al Qaida on US soil. When that is proved to be a lie, you move on to al Quaida on US soil with American deaths. At that point, we only have 3 examples over the past few decades. Two if you don't count a US warship as US soil. Granted, I am counting the events of 911 as one. That is moving the goal posts. And you move them to the point that they don't mean anything. "However, MOST of the increase in terrorism since 2001 is attributable to the use of terrorism tactics in the Iraq war, which obviously can't rationally be considered." Umm, no, that is another lie. I will grant you that most of the reports of terrorism in the MSM has been in Iraq. But that is hardly the sum total. "My argument is and has been that as a result of the Bush administration, the United States is a safer place than it was on 9/10/2001. This is self-evident." That might be your argument. But that doesn't mean it is any sort of consensual reality. Nor is it self-evident. We have only had two events that fit your criteria. Over the past few decades if you want to count the lifespan of al Qaida or the past few centuries if you want to count the life of our country. Again, google "fallacious arguments". Both you and Tenchu could benefit.