Page 26 of 27 FirstFirst ... 1624252627 LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 266

Thread: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

  1. #251
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:19 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,548

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Hamas has many members - at all levels of the organization - who aren't particularly interested in destroying Israel.
    Who are they?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  2. #252
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Has there ever been a missle silo in a school to your knowledge?
    Irrelevant to the issue.
    You're arguing that there's --never-- a legitmate reason to level a school.
    He simply wants to see if you're --sure-- that you mean that.

  3. #253
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Irrelevant to the issue.
    You're arguing that there's --never-- a legitmate reason to level a school.
    He simply wants to see if you're --sure-- that you mean that.
    I've explained that my initial premise that led to the statement is based on that which is possible. If I can be shown that a situation would ever exist that shows that the situation described is indeed plausible, instead of implausible (which my assertion assumes) then the statement would be changed accordingly.

    In my opinion, if it is possible that the enemy can create a truly legitimate threat, they would NOT hide this legitimate threat at a school.


    Thus, there is never a legitimate reason to level a school because there is no such thing as a "legitimate threat" coming from a school.

    If there is evidence to refute my claim that a legitimate, effective threat can come form a school, I will gladly retract my statement with apologies.

    That is why the need to give evidence of a legitimate effective threat existing in a school is quite relevant.

    Otherwise, we are using implausibilities to justify abhorent behavior, simply becaus etheir could "hypotehtically exist a situation that has never existed before and does not exist today".

    Thus, I am "sure" of my statement until my initial premise of implausibility is proven false, which up to now, nobody has done.

    So I can repeate, there is no justifiable reason to level a school.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  4. #254
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I've explained that my initial premise that led to the statement is based on that which is possible. If I can be shown that a situation would ever exist that shows that the situation described is indeed plausible, instead of implausible (which my assertion assumes) then the statement would be changed accordingly.
    Its a hypothetical designed to test your position -- IF someone were to place a missile silo...
    Arguing against the given is generally considered a concession of the point.

    In my opinion, if it is possible that the enemy can create a truly legitimate threat, they would NOT hide this legitimate threat at a school.
    On what do you base that?

  5. #255
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Its a hypothetical designed to test your position -- IF someone were to place a missile silo...
    Arguing against the given is generally considered a concession of the point.
    My comment did not relate to hypotheticals, just reality. If you can show me a legitimate effective threat being housed in a school, then my statement would be false, and I would admit that.

    But to my knowledge, there has never been a legitimate threat housed in a school. If I were proven false on this, I would admit as such, but nobody has tried to show that a legitimately effective threat has been housed in a school and thus warrants the leveling of the school.

    Hypotheticals don't cut the mustard because hypothetically there could be, but since it has never been done to my knowledge, we have to consider it an extremely unlikely scenario.


    On what do you base that?
    The lack of any legitimate threats coming from schools, as displayed by the lack of evidence.

    Legitimate threats do not rely on hiding their weapons, because of the fact that they are indeed legitimate threats.

    Ineffective weapons are the main reason Hamas acts like cowards. Otehrwise Israel would be able to step in, destroy all of them, and not have to worry about the PR war at all.

    The only effective weapon Hamas has is the PR war. That's the primary reason they use human shields. They know they cannot create a legit threat to Israel without gaining international support by goading Israel to act in a fashion that "justifies" Hamas' own illegitimate tactics.




    But all that being said, I actually have directly answered teh hypothetical, admitting that it would defeat my logic if it were a reality instead of a hypothetical (Parts in bold are relevant, the underlined bold parts being the most relevant):

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    You've stated that the Hypothetical is plausible, my contention is that it will never happen. I am willing to change my view if you show me that it is probable by showing a legitimate threat coming from a school.

    As far as the hypothetical goes, I honestly don't see it as plausible, so I can't answer it with honesty without defeating my own logic which I based on what I think is plausible.

    I truly do not think it is plausible for a legitimate threat to come form a school that cannot be defeated with ground forces instead of blowing up the school.

    If such a threat were to exist, I would need to change my logic as then it would have been based on a faulty premise (i.e. that it isn't plausible for a legitimate threat to come from a school).

    Perhaps, I overstated things by not clarifying that this is my initial premise. this is an over-heated discussion, and I apologize for any disrespect I may have given.

    Let me simply answer the hypothetical that you've described, but please the fact that I don't think that is a plausible scenario in mind:

    If a legitimate threat existed, that had a high probability of efficacy, such as a missile silo would, at a school, that school would cease to be a school in my opinion. It would become a legitimate military target specifically because it would become a legitimate military threat.

    That being said (conceded, if you will), the hypothetical does NOT apply to this particular situation for a multitude of reasons nor does it have any basis in reality in that it has never been seen to date.

    If I am wrong, and such a legitimate threat has ever existed within a school, I will retract my comments that there is never a justification to bomb a school. But as I have not been faced with that, only a hypothetical scenario I find implausible, I cannot in good conscious retract, since the scenario is not based on reality but only what I deem to be an implausible hypothetical that has never been reached to date.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  6. #256
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    My comment did not relate to hypotheticals, just reality.
    The veracity of a position is often tested by hyoptheticals.

    For instance:
    Statement:
    "I would never kill anyone"
    Response:
    "If the only way to stop your daughter from being raped was to kill someone, would you kill that someone?"

    The "if" in the hypothetcial creates a given, that the situation described has occoured -- that you don't actually have a daughter is irrelevant.

    As such, your requirement for an actual example is meaningless.

    The lack of any legitimate threats coming from schools, as displayed by the lack of evidence.
    That it hasnt yet happened means that it will never happen?
    So... we'll never be visited by aliens. Right?

    Legitimate threats do not rely on hiding their weapons, because of the fact that they are indeed legitimate threats.
    Not at all true. Weapons are hidden all the time. Concealment from observation is a standard practice.

    But all that being said, I actually have directly answered teh hypothetical, admitting that it would defeat my logic if it were a reality instead of a hypothetical (Parts in bold are relevant, the underlined bold parts being the most relevant):
    So you agree, that if a 'legitimate threat' were emplaced within a school, leveling the school would be justified.

  7. #257
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The veracity of a position is often tested by hyoptheticals.

    For instance:
    Statement:
    "I would never kill anyone"
    Response:
    "If the only way to stop your daughter from being raped was to kill someone, would you kill that someone?"

    The "if" in the hypothetcial creates a given, that the situation described has occoured -- that you don't actually have a daughter is irrelevant.

    As such, your requirement for an actual example is meaningless.
    Would is a future tense. I did not say "There could never be....", I said "there is never...".

    That means I'm remaining grounded in the present. Thus a requirement for example is not meaningless. Had I said "There CAN/COULD never be" a hypothetical is a proper test, but since I said "There IS never..." I'm remaining grounded in the present, and the logic is NOT subject to hypotheticals, only reality.

    As such, I would say that the logic still stands until proven false by reality.


    That it hasnt yet happened means that it will never happen?
    So... we'll never be visited by aliens. Right?
    I see no evidence to suggest either scenario will happen, so I must base my logic on what is "known" not what can be imagined.


    Not at all true. Weapons are hidden all the time. Concealment from observation is a standard practice.

    I should have qualified that, legitimate threats don't hide their weapons in schools.

    So you agree, that if a 'legitimate threat' were emplaced within a school, leveling the school would be justified.
    No, I don't agree because the statement isn't specific enough.

    I would say that "If a legitimate, effective and imminent threat were housed in a school AND a ground strike was an impossible response to prevent the attack, then leveling the school MAY be justified."

    It would depend on the scenario quite specifically.

    But since there is no evidence of any of the qualifications being met at any time in history, to my knowledge, I can stand firm on my "is" statement since it was dealing with reality.

    If a legitimate, efficient and imminent threat were shown to actually exist at a school where a ground force were an impossiblity to prevent the attack, I would say that the lesser of two evils would likely fall on destroying the school.

    There are four qualifications that must be met, not just one.

    Simply housing a missle silo on a school is not enough to warrant destroying the school. There must also be an imminent and effective threat in order to justify the choice of blowng it to hell instead of a ground assault.

    Since there is nothing to lead me to believe that these qualifications are met anywhere or anytime to date, I must say factually there IS never a justification to blow a school to hell.


    Had I said "there could never be" I would retract the statement as incorrect, becuase there COULD hypotethically exist such conditions, but to my knowledge they do not exist in reality therefore, the present tense statement would remain factual and logical.

    As I said, the error was on my part for not clarifying this point earlier. It's not simple semantics either. There is a legitimate logical difference between "could be" and "is", and I was cognizant of that when I made the statement.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #258
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Would is a future tense. I did not say "There could never be....", I said "there is never...".
    So, you SHOULD have said "there has never been".
    If so... big deal. All you're stating is hat you believe to have already occoured.

    I would say that "If a legitimate, effective and imminent threat were housed in a school AND a ground strike was an impossible response to prevent the attack, then leveling the school MAY be justified."

    If a legitimate, efficient and imminent threat were shown to actually exist at a school where a ground force were an impossiblity to prevent the attack, I would say that the lesser of two evils would likely fall on destroying the school.
    Good enough.

  9. #259
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    So, you SHOULD have said "there has never been".
    If so... big deal. All you're stating is hat you believe to have already occoured.
    My statement also includes "There is currently no Justification" as well as "there has never been a justification". That's why it would be more appropriate than "there has never been".

    But if it were shown that there currently is justification, then it would be erroneous to phrase it as I did.

    Good enough.
    Glad to know it meets the sniff test.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  10. #260
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,571

    Re: Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'

    How do you negotiate with people whos platform is your death?
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

Page 26 of 27 FirstFirst ... 1624252627 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •