Gurdur

Oh ? I find it easy to copy-and-paste people's multiple quotes, and format a reply.

Really ? Clarify whether you speak as a mod or private person; either way, you're off-topic.

gulfwar_veteran

What you just did was quote out of context and presented yourself as a smartass.

In replying to another's post, whether it is a short or lengthy one, others often make a lot of points (or lack thereof) that need to be individually addressed, questioned and/or augmented. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being thorough (making your position clear and understandable all the while refuting your opponent) in your replies. Which doesn't include the way you just did it. There is a proper format to it, and your reply to me wasn't it.

In any case, it may be your opinion (which can be summed up as: just throw out the text and give me the pictures) but I highly doubt it is a shared one.

GWV

Liquidrage

Billy Graham's on the finer points of aeronautical engineering?
Nice to comare a science to a matter that is nothing but opinion.

If you want to wrestle over my initial post on the matter be my guest, but I'm not playing. There was never any intent on my part to say that in all regards all opinions should be considered with the same worth. However, it was my intent to state that everyone is entitled to their opinion and to share that opinion and have that opinion be weighed on its own merits.

Gurdur

Oh, and 99percent, I notice you use exactly the tactics in this thread for one post you are whining about here, and that post of yours wasn't even a constructive one in any way whatsoever in that thread.

So I guess you're bing hypocritical - and stop trying to hijack the thread with your bullying tactics.
Let's get back on topic - and believe me, I'll take this further if needs be.

99Percent

Whatever. I won't respond in the hope the thread gets back on topic.

Carry on.

Gurdur

Your refusal to specify whether you were speaking as a moderator or a private person has been noted.

Now let us carry on the discussion you attempted to hijack.

RED DAVE

NEO:

Several days ago, you wrote the following in a reply to me:

Too fucking bad if I offended you! You haven't got the moxie to offend me.

With regard to the comparison of homophobia to racism in the military you wrote:

So, for you, being around gays is "a test to ones sense of self and their sexuality".

What I think you're saying in this murky little remark is that the presence of homosexuals around you threatens your sense of "self and sexuality." Note the use of the words ones and their in order to detach from you're writing.

In relation to the fact that I fought to stay out of the Army during Vietnam you wrote:

I guess comparing someone to Clinton says it all for you. That's a cogent argument if I ever heard one.

With regard to my remarks about "the incredibly reactionary nature of the military establishment" you wrote:

And later, when I compared an invasion of Iraq to an invation of Grenada you wrote:

[/QUOTE]Like I said, you obviously don't know a damn thing about the military much less what it means to serve this country.[/QUOTE]

Now, in my experience ,politically, the tactic of claiming that your opponent is ignorant, doesn't know what they're talking about, etc., is a pretty weak one. It's a combination of an appeal to authority (yours), an appeal to subjective experience (again yours) and a not-so-subtle put down.

Nice work if you can get it.

Neo, named after a character in a thrid-rate science fiction movie, resident of Star Fleet Academy, in the words of William Shatner, "Get a life!"

RED DAVE

gulfwar_veteran

Originally posted by RED DAVE
Impressive trailer trash language RD!

Oh, and BTW, didn't you notice I used your exact words (hint: the bolded portion of my quote) in response to your absurd reply. Which I'll do again, RD, 'you haven't got the moxie to offend me.'

Straw man. I never said or implied I was ever answering for 'me.'

Another straw man.

Exactly! Because I am not writing about me, I am responding as the observer! The question of 'Gays in the Military' doesn't revolve around me but it most certainly does everyone who (currently) serves in the armed forces. They are the ones faced with the issue, not me. Therefore, I am not answer for 'me'!

WOW! Talk about an emotional (irrational) knee-jerk reaction to my response to you RD. You're losing all train of thought here. If you were on track (being rational and thought before you spoke), you would have realized I used Clinton merely as an example of another person who (draft dodger) "fought to stay out of the Army during Vietnam." Nothing more, nothing less.

You obviously missed my argument by analogy. Here, just for you:

If you had a plumbing problem, would you call an electrician (who has absolutely no knowledge and/or experience in plumbing) or a plumber (who has the knowledge and experience in plumbing)? Obviously the electrician doesn't have the knowledge or the experience of being a plumber (hence, his ignorance about plumbing). Therefore, you would call the plumber.

So no, RD, making a statement of fact based on an observation is not a weak argument. The clear observation here is the electrician is obviously not a plumber, so he wouldn't know what to do nor could he explain the problem to you. That's a just a plain fact, so you call the plumber.

The crystal clear observation here is you admit to being a draft dodger thereby refusing to serve your country. And since you've never served then or now, you lack the first hand knowledge and experience of that service. Therefore, you are ignorant of the true nature of the beast when it comes to answering the question posted in this thread.

In order for anyone who has not served to get a better understanding of this issue so they can make an informed decision/opinion about it, that knowledge must come from those who have in fact served. Otherwise it's just plain speculation. I mean really, they are after all at the center of this issue, 'Gays in the military.'

WOW! Now that was original!

Using Shatner, a man loathed by his collegues (and Star Trek Fans) for his obnoxious, pompous and self-centered attitude as your spokesperson fits you to a "T" RD! Between him and Clinton, you're on a roll!

As for the Neo reference, well, that doesn't much for you and your lack of taste in sci-fi.

LOL!!

GWV
formerly Neo

Hugo Holbling

Are you saying that posters here shouldn't respond in like fashion, that we can't critique the relevance of opinions from posters with differing experiences, or merely continuing a spat with Gurdur without your moderator hat on? In the interest of clarity, IMO a moderator ought to make it more obvious in which guise his complaint is presented.

With regard to my last post (which appears to have escaped comment), what are the views of those persons here present on the merits or otherwise of allowing decisions affecting the military to be made by politicians or judges (as with the UK's policy reversal)? Should the military have to justify its actions on extra-operational terms?

Loren Pechtel

Originally posted by Hugo Holbling
Are you saying that posters here shouldn't respond in like fashion, that we can't critique the relevance of opinions from posters with differing experiences, or merely continuing a spat with Gurdur without your moderator hat on? In the interest of clarity, IMO a moderator ought to make it more obvious in which guise his complaint is presented.

I think what he was objecting to is the line of message/line of reply quoting. It *IS* hard to read.