Search results

but, there is a difference from discussing a culture, and discussing a race, and the two are not the same also not sure why you bring aboriginals into it, but fair enough

you don't have a substantiated claim then

culture is NOT the same as race in any way. Culture is the environment one lives and is raised in, whereas race is biological. I've got no problem with criticising someone on culture, but thats very different from judging on race, even though cultural groups often share a racial identity

prove you wrong? what, i'm supposed to give a transcript of every single word that was ever said by every leader of india since 1947 and then show that none mentions destroying Pakistan? do you have ANY concept of burden of proof? All you have to do is give 1 quote that you're right about an...

was your statement there america blew up a mosque killing hundreds of civilians or did i misunderstand what that amidst part was? either way, could you give some sort of link on that one? and so then what is your solution, given that many of the terrorists want control of Iraq rather than the...

you don't judge anyone ever? at all? thats an impossible claim to make and still be a sane person. to use an extreme example, do you judge someone as being wrong if they thing stealing is ok? of course, blanket assumptions aren't always valid when talking about large groups, but judging someone...

thank you for stating exactly why i was questioning him

the point he made with choice was that there is a difference from judging or questioning people based on what ideology they choose to adhere to and judging and questioning people based on things like ethnicity, which people CAN'T choose or change.

of course, which is why i'm supportive of getting rid of them, and i do believe that many of them want power not just over the u.s. and forcing them out, but also they want power over other Iraqis

ok, then by all means, give me a quote of a leader of india stating that they would completely destroy Pakistan. though, why do you use 1945? there wasn't a pakistan in 1945

so, what you're saying is....if not for the terrorists, iraqis would feel secure now, and so there wouldn't be issues with violence, or anger toward america?

no, because if you agree about that, then you're acknowledging some truth in what Generator said. Its a self-contradiction

no, even though they're fighting, i haven't heard any quotes from India about destroying Pakistan. The idea of not letting Iran have nukes is the idea that Iran will use them to start a war, or obliterate Israel, or let a terrorist organisation get ahold of them.

HotShot, just answer me one question, How does targetting innocent Iraqis to blow up HELP Iraqis?

it just means taht after you, no other guy would do. take it in stride

then i clearly missed her saying that... where did she say that?

no, your point was she was contradictory, which she wasn't. its off-topic, but not a contradictory statement, nor does it imply that she accepts that there is a god for some belief structures

thats not at all how i read what she said. i believe it comes from.... if someone will respect my views and not force them on me and be civil about their views, then i will respect them, even if i disagree with their views. to put it in a political frame.... i don't see an issue with the...

Vietnam was an ignorant mess....see, this is what happens when the U.S. tries to bail out France (and yeah, big Cold War overtones as well) care to justify how its 'rightfully' Mexico's? keep in mind that as of World War I, Mexico had controlled the southwest for a stretch of 38 years...

she said she didn't have a problem with them, not that they were felt were right though, i thought. it would sound like a live and let live philosophy to me. if i don't have to worry about a religious group trying to force their views on me, i'm going to have far less objections to taht...