Friday, 12 June 2015

12th June 2015

Europe and the United States have not failed in the middle East it is the countries themselves of the Middle East with their backward illogical and ridiculous tribalism and religious extremism that’s failed. 
The so called leaders in the region are the one’s who could stop all this slaughter, this genocide within day’s if they cared to.
But in due course Isis will fail big time anyway, like Al-Qaida it will fall apart from within, when it’s military leadership at it’s centre weakens like it is doing now, then the remaining structure of this rag tag so called army will collapse in disarray.
The pathetic creatures that Isis recruit despite their intelligence or education are so easy led and gullible, both male and female.
 The Isis psychopathic leaders recruit and use them just for cannon fodder, these fools are so out of their tiny little minds with all the superstitious mythological hairy fairy religious claptrap that’s been drummed into  their heads by religious spouting con-men that they are incapable of any rational human decency or logical thought.
They are just used for cannon fodder, their indoctrination in all this religious flannel is so compelling and so ingrained in their psychic that they seek the end of the world with rapture, their Armageddon.
While the real Isis leaders safe and snug in the luxurious background they reside in away from danger, encourage their minions to more murder, rape and torture.
The real aim of the Isis leadership is not the second coming it’s all about today and their self-serving position in life, for them it’s got nothing to do with religion.
If the truth was known these leaders probably scorn religion and just use it as a means to an end.
They just seek political power, more wealth for themselves and complete domination over whoever crosses their path.

Prettybitty58 to Bigrunner
Absolutely superb comments. You have hit so many nails on the head. The Middle East will be at war forever, it's a fact. No one and nothing will change that. It's their mentality. Whether it's because of religion or just plain barbarism they will always continue to murder and destroy one another. Let em. You CANNOT reason with these mindless morons.

Oxfordbiker to Bigrunner
Cyclists do not have to cycle in cycle lanes, they are advisory, just like those advanced stop spaces at traffic lights which motorists habitually enter.

Bigrunner to Oxfordbiker
More fool them if they don’t use the Cycle lanes.
They should have the common sense to ride in them, and I am sure most of them  do.

Bigrunner to Carpasia
Why do you comment on something I already know ?
Your pontification does you no credit.

Carpasia to Bigrunner
BigRunner, I am no pope, and so I do not pontificate. I comment and Comment is Free. When it not, I will still comment, for I am a human being. Thank you for your comment.

Bigrunner to Carpasia
You have no need to be a Pope to pontificate.
Many people unknowingly pontificate in a kind of dogmatic way, others are so wrapped up in their own importance they are unable to accept that they could be anything of the sort, thanks for your response.

Carpasia to Bigrunner
When a man says to me that he agrees with what I said so thoroughly that I had not even the right to say it, and then comes back again to reiterate his former comment by adding to it the notion that the objection to the original comment, in the manner it was then stated, can be expanded upon to include yet more ignorance on my part, in the unknowing nature of the statements I made, as if I were possessed by a papal spirit while not residing at the Holy See, then I think that the only purpose of this person is to shoot the messenger and then say that there is a value in shooting the messenger.
In ancient times the Persian kings executed men who brought them bad tidings. We are not Persians, and these are modern times, where freedom has developed somewhat from whatever it meant then.
If you are saying you are important too, and so my statements, made without knowing of your existence, somehow unknowingly diminished your importance, I do not think I have to answer for it. Nor would you, in similar circumstances, I am sure. Your greatness, and you may well be great, cannot depend on diminishing mine, where you know me not, and I have not even claimed it.

Bigrunner to Carpasia
I find your ignorance so expansive it beggars belief.
Maybe in this case your suggestion about shooting the messenger may well be the best and most appropriate action to take.
Persian Kings…what’s all that about ?
With reference to diminishing you, It seems like your not doing a bad job of that all on your own.
So originally the subject of this thread in the first place was ‘How Isis crippled Al-Qaida’ so with regards to that original subject I haven’t the faintest idea what you are trying to imply or inform me of.

Carpasia to Bigrunner
Every time you write, there is a little more invalidation unfolding. 
This time, you start by indicating your opinion of me has now ballooned from 1) merely dismissing me for saying something so obvious, known and, impliedly, agreeable to you that I was pontificating through 2) indicating I was probably delusional, again, by possibly thinking I was in fact the pope, to now this 3) an outright attack on me as ignorant, with sundry other of my follies thrown in for good measure.
Let me analyze the situation from a common sense perspective. 
If you already knew, and impliedly agreed with, what I said, you did not need to reply at all. If you did reply, you could have simply said you agreed with me. 
Stranger things have happened on these forums than that of a short, duly noted, agreement.
What actually beggars belief here is that, having essentially agreed with me in the first place, you continue your assaults. It is always an unusual thing in real, as opposed to online, life when someone has such a dislike for another person that when that person says something that happens to coincide with their values or knowledge, they proceed to attack them anyways. We do not even know each other, and I do not recall seeing you on past threads, and please correct me if I am wrong. So, that cannot be it.
I do not know how to explain it. Either you simply find my manner of expression so offensive to you in some inchoate fashion that renders you unable to restrain yourself, or else you never agreed with me at all, but said you did in order to simply skip, thereafter, into accusing me of pontificating, a subtle form of the ad hominem argument that simply changes the agenda for other readers and puts a seed of doubt in their mind about the writer opposed. It works on threads like this as the original post is already read and can be slowly undermined, in a death by inches approach, even by writers in tandem working in concert.
In the first case, I cannot apologize to you for being me, and knowing what I know, and expressing it in the manner, natural and honest to me, that I do.
In the second case, well, that would explain the inveterate nature of your returns to the thread, because the ad hominem argument in question only works if not responded to and, really, it kind of has to be the last word.
Now I know that there are many subtle minds here on the forums, and that the use of language and rhetoric can be crafted to form opinion in obvious and direct manner, which I do, and in less obvious, indirect manners.
If you look at urban rodeo's post, for example, and remembering this is an article about al-Qaida, ISIS, and an undeclared war between the west and the Islamic world, namely, the war on terror, he basically said that Arabs are nice, history has no meaning and all knowledge is subjective, leaving aside every issue of substance, veritable issues of life and death. One could even think to read him, in a bizarre way, that it is okay to war on Arabs because they were nice enough to civilize us. I have a brain. I do not believe urban rodeo does not have a brain, and that is what urban rodeo expressly says, and what it must mean is that might is right, because Protagoras said the same essential things urban rodeo said, except the bit about people being nice and civilized and so it is okay to make war on them because we can. Protagoras said we can war on who we wish, period, so for him, Protagoras, that is, they can be naughty or nice, as it really doesn't matter.
Anyways, I will keep responding to your remarks whatever you say, as it is my nature to seek, and fight for, the truth. I will not submit to any argument that has no substance and only form, and the only form of which is to minimize or detract from me.
You have not said one thing of substance in response to my post. That is a fact. So if you know it all already, and took a posture that it was all so obvious that I acted with temerity in even saying it, why don't you either leave me alone, or respond with a position of substance, and we can debate the matter like gentlemen?

Bigrunner to Carpasia
You seem to be of the opinion I have agreed with you I think you will find in my first reply to you that was not the case.
How on Earth did you come to the conclusion that I could possibly think you to be the Pope ?
I also have no wish for you to apologise for you being you.
Regards the post by Urban Rodeo a comment I have not read, but what Urban Rodeo comments on about Arabs being nice and History that possesses no meaning and that all knowledge is subjective, well if that’s the opinion of Urban Rodeo so be it.
My opinion is that Isis is a murdering cult, fooled into believing pie in the sky nonsensical religious nonsense, and like their counterparts Al-Qaida they will crumble, they will scatter like the cowardly vermin they are, only to be eventually exterminated like rats in a sack.
Gullible people see religion to be true.
Wise people see religion to be false.
Their rulers see it to be useful.

Carpasia to Bigrunner
Yes, if that is your opinion, that is fine. It does not matter to my opinion, because my opinion is not about judging people for being who or what they are. My opinion is about history, and learning from history. 
What difference did it make that men raged in London about Robespierre? No difference. That is what difference it made. My opinion is that people are what they are, and should be understood and not killed for it. 
You are saying is that you have decided these people have been fooled into being the people they are. That is impossible. What people have you ever met in your life you can actually say that about? We know brain washing cannot work because so many men emerged from so many years at Guantanamo basically intact. 
You say they are rats. I say they are people. 
You say they are gullible. I say they believe in something. 
You say wise people see religion to be false. Wise people see nothing of the kind as a rule. And wise people do not kill people who they think are not wise, or for not being wise. That is not wisdom. In fact, wise people do not judge other people, and they suggest to others they cannot be wise if they judge without understanding, imagination and empathy. Jesus would be a good example of a very young man possessed of preternatural wisdom, and he did not judge, and he does not have to be a god for that statement to be true.
I will not return to the pontification, delusion line of argument you advanced. I dealt with it already. Generally, people can get confused when others do not make their actual points, or even deal with ideas they oppose with their ideas, but instead focus their arguments against the person putting forward the ideas they oppose. You have now made your ideas clear, and I thank you for it. 
Thank you for your response.