Kerry, Bush and Armenians

[xBaron Dants]

ooooo, you should come to Montreal and I'll give you a big hug!

Man, seriously....that sucks. Just the fact that you would be frustrated to the point of saying that thing about the turks is sickening, as I can't even start to imagine how horrible these people might have been with you.

I've had my fair share of annoying Armenians, and it is very weird to say that from 9-10 years of going to the same Armenian school with the same Armenian people, I keep contact with maybe 2 or 3 of them. But after leaving that school, I have met other Armenians, who have become my best friends. But then again, I have almost no contact with most Armenians at my college, as they are just annoying, as are most people at my college.

So yea....all this to say....I don't know really.....

[Anonymouse]

Kerry is Jewish so he'll probably protect the Nazi's!!!!!!

[HyeJinx1984]

ooooo, you should come to Montreal and I'll give you a big hug!

Man, seriously....that sucks. Just the fact that you would be frustrated to the point of saying that thing about the turks is sickening, as I can't even start to imagine how horrible these people might have been with you.

I've had my fair share of annoying Armenians, and it is very weird to say that from 9-10 years of going to the same Armenian school with the same Armenian people, I keep contact with maybe 2 or 3 of them. But after leaving that school, I have met other Armenians, who have become my best friends. But then again, I have almost no contact with most Armenians at my college, as they are just annoying, as are most people at my college.

So yea....all this to say....I don't know really.....

Eh, it's all good, was nice to get that stuff of my chest and do a little bit of venting. I'm sitting here with Armenian tea chatting to you guys with my Jivan Gasperyan CD playing the background. Life is good.

[dusken]

Your replies do not seem to be related at all to what I'm talking about. It seems to me that you're the one who's been using the red herring fallacy in this thread, not I, with all that relativist talk about who's good and how good is defined.


lol.. you have a way of twisting things and making it seem like *I'm* the one who's arguing about relativity... I beg to differ. If I vote for someone, it wouldn't be because I prefer their hair over the other candidate's hair, but because I think he/she would take decisions that would enhance my position/agenda or the position/agenda of my group, rather than taking decisions that would hurt me. I'm not talking about relativity here. I'm talking about comparative voting. You don't seem to understand the difference between the two arguments (one of which is yours, mind you).


And you weren't? Remember, you're the one who introduced the concept of relativity in this thread, and you're the one who kept arguing about the "idiot" comment being illogical.


Wow, and here again, you insist that I started with the relativist argument... Impressive.


How do you know he's the better candidate? Just because you know person X is bad doesn't mean person Y is necessarily better......... Logic 101. Hence it's naive.


Umm, do you know what sarcasm means?


It doesn't mean I'm not stupid though, does it? If I have enough proof that you're stupid, then you're stupid, and the comment is not out of line.

I recommend that you enrol yourself in Logic 101 ASAP.

I suggest you learn how to debate, get help with your memory, learn logic yourself because you have no understanding of it, and see a psychologist who will help you accept the fact that you cannot be perfect. Anyone with an IQ of 50 who happened to be reading your responses to me would have had a good laugh. You have no idea what you are talking about.

[surferarmo]

The U.S. is the most aggressive and imperialistic country, with presence in many parts of the world. Are we forgetting that it was alot of the U.S. doings that funded and bred terrorism to begin with? Did you forget who supported the Taliban and bin Laden, and Hussein?

Actually, I would argue that the United Nations is responsible for some if not most of this so called aggression. France, China, Russia, Germany, and the USA did support and fund these groups for a time. That still does not make us the most aggressive. Why do these countries not accept responsibility for their actions? The US is the biggest and among the most powerful, and just like in that analogy I presented earlier the bigger guy gets the blame because of the fact that he is bigger. These presentations of the US as being the most aggressive by other countries is simply ridiculous. They all have a plot in it, and they are constantly hassle us in the media to gain an international political spotlight as the mediators of the world. Its a crock.

You are right that we are somewhat imperialist in the sense that we have territories outside of our boarders ie. Somoa, Cuba, etc... however, other countries are much more imperialistic. What about most of the countries in Africa, what about Great Britian. Just because we are physically bigger, and France is crying about it doesnt mean we are more imperialistic or aggressive.

I believe in some instances we are more aggressive. For instance with the war on terror. Other countries are more aggressive with issues that do not affect us much. To say we are generally more aggressive is more of an assumption than a fact. You hear about the US every day because the world always wants to know what is going on with us. If they do not care about us or care to hear about this country, well thats too bad, because they are going to hear it anyway. You never hear about Liberia, or the Congo or Turkmenistan, or Armenia, or Yugslavia, or Belgium in the News. I believe that if we were to hear about these other states, our country and its dealings with other parts of the world would seem we would have a different perspective.

I think this issue is a matter of opinion. I can find many instances where other countries have "x" amount of territories, and you can do the same for the US, it will depend on how we perceive it. Correct me if I am wrong.

[Darorinag]

I suggest you learn how to debate, get help with your memory, learn logic yourself because you have no understanding of it, and see a psychologist who will help you accept the fact that you cannot be perfect. Anyone with an IQ of 50 who happened to be reading your responses to me would have had a good laugh. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Heh... another fallacy. Is that your best shot?

[dusken]

Heh... another fallacy. Is that your best shot?

The child does not know the difference between rhetoric and fallacy. Go whacksterbate somewhere else.

[surferarmo]

Jinx, and Baron. Stop crying. You have both managed to turn this into a rehab center or some sort of heritage therapy. The fact is Hyejinx that your President will support Armenian Americans here. Alright moron, I have to get back to work.

[Darorinag]

Speaking of the "war on terror", did anyone see that video of the Turkish guy being shot?

Anyway, I fail to see how Kerry would make things any better. Unless you consider withdrawing the troops from Iraq "making things better".... in which case, I would argue that it would've been much much better if USA hadn't attacked Iraq in the first place, because withdrawal is an admission of weakness or defeat. Say what you will, I still stand by what I said. Saddam had those fundamentalists under control, now that he's gone, and if America withdraws, who's going to stop them? Not that America is being able to stop them anyway, but at least it's better when they're there, for the religious minorities in Iraq..

[surferarmo]

Ohh damn. I have an IQ of 49.9, do you think I will be able to understand Dar's responses?