Nobel speech

[Winehole23]

I thought about asking who you were and what you had done with the 'Poster formerly known as Winehole' who was occasionally sardonic, though usually insightful. consistently thoughtful, and rarely, if ever, mean-spirited. You clearly must be someone else because never before has WH consistently self-referred in the third person, as has been a recent phonemenon in the "new WH" posts.


After the 12th inane pic in a row, however, I just want you to get back on your meds, whoever you are.

Fair enough. My posts aren't for everyone. I recognize that. I can reel it in if I'm perceived to be a nuisance.

[Winehole23]

Sorry, I'm just not swayed by the tough talk. Defend Obama's Peace prize speech all you want, EVAY. It didn't move me.

[Winehole23]

What can I say? The world's policeman crap has gotten old. It's not our job, and it's not supposed to be our job. Plus which, it's onerously costly, even in 21st century terms.

[rjv]

it was a terrible speech. eloquent, yes. truthful, no. it hid the fact that afghanistan is unwinnable with a bunch of rehashed "just cause" and "principle of forfeiture" military ethics. it reminded me of all the "red menace" scare speeches of the cold war.

[DarrinS]

Obama needs to get back to apologizing for America's sins before he loses his base.

[EmptyMan]

Obama gave a warlike speech at the Nobel Peace award ceremony. Apparently, Obama talking tuff is enough to take in the gullible, spongiform intelligence of board moderates and conservatives.

Time to wring out the sponge and change the water in the mop bucket: it's stale.

lmao!

I said it was a good speech.

A speech is a collection of words.

Words mean in this world.

[mogrovejo]

it was a terrible speech. eloquent, yes. truthful, no. it hid the fact that afghanistan is unwinnable with a bunch of rehashed "just cause" and "principle of forfeiture" military ethics. it reminded me of all the "red menace" scare speeches of the cold war.

And of all the Churchill scare speeches about the nazi menace in the 30s.

[Winehole23]

What's the historical equiavlent to the Nazi menace again? A more or less naked reductio ad hitlerum neither satisfies nor does you credit, mogrovejo.

[mogrovejo]

What's the historical equiavlent to the Nazi menace again? A more or less naked reductio ad hitlerum neither satisfies nor does you credit, mogrovejo.

Soviet expansionism. In fact, I could have mentioned Churchill's speeches in the 40s and 50s.

[Winehole23]

I meant in the present day.

[rjv]

And of all the Churchill scare speeches about the nazi menace in the 30s.

wow. the taliban are expanding into central america and asia. and maintain the best army in the world. they have the best tanks, the best air force, a vast nuclear arsenal.

funny how mogro makes no mention of the complete disaster that was known as the soviet occupation of the 80's. or even how concerns about the soviet expansion led to such successful campaigns as korea and vietnam.

[rjv]

What's the historical equiavlent to the Nazi menace again? A more or less naked reductio ad hitlerum neither satisfies nor does you credit, mogrovejo.

the self proclaimed king of logic commits a fallacy? never?!

[mogrovejo]

wow. the taliban are expanding into central america and asia. and maintain the best army in the world. they have the best tanks, the best air force, a vast nuclear arsenal.

funny how mogro makes no mention of the complete disaster that was known as the soviet occupation of the 80's. or even how concerns about the soviet expansion led to such successful campaigns as korea and vietnam.

the self proclaimed king of logic commits a fallacy? never?!

You were the one making the analogy to the "red menace" scare speeches, not me.

[mogrovejo]

I meant in the present day.

There's none, but talk to rjv about that.

[rjv]

You were the one making the analogy to the "red menace" scare speeches, not me.

i didn't realize that saying "it reminded me of" qualified as a either an an analogy or syllogism.

[rjv]

There's none, but talk to rjv about that.

don't pass the buck. i was alluding to fear mongering. you started putting things in historical context with a sardonic implication that the nazis were yesteryear's taliban. winehole is not interested in the psychology of rhetoric. he wants to know how it is you think the nazi's could even compare to any miltary threat out there today.

[mogrovejo]

i didn't realize that saying "it reminded me of" qualified as a either an an analogy or syllogism.

If it wasn't an analogy, then there was no analogy made. If "it reminded you of" the cold war speeches, it surely reminded you of the Churchill's scare speeches in the 30s as well, unless you haven't read them.

[rjv]

If it wasn't an analogy, then there was no analogy made. If "it reminded you of" the cold war speeches, it surely reminded you of the Churchill's scare speeches in the 30s as well, unless you haven't read them.

and now you actually have access to my cortical lobes. amazing.

[mogrovejo]

and now you actually have access to my cortical lobes. amazing.

It didn't? If it didn't, just say so, I'll gladly apologize for making an incorrect assumption.

[rjv]

It didn't? If it didn't, just say so, I'll gladly apologize for making an incorrect assumption.

it was a perfunctory statement based on a perfunctory observation. my intent was not to initiate a lengthy discussion regarding the similarities between the US conflict with the taliban and insurgents in afganistan to the growing nazi threats of the 1930's.

[mogrovejo]

it was a perfunctory statement based on a perfunctory observation. my intent was not to initiate a lengthy discussion regarding the similarities between the US conflict with the taliban and insurgents in afganistan to the growing nazi threats of the 1930's.

Mine neither. The only thing I did was to add "And of all the Churchill scare speeches about the nazi menace in the 30s". You certainly reckon that speeches about the communist menace are similar to those about the nazi menace.

[rjv]

Mine neither. The only thing I did was to add "And of all the Churchill scare speeches about the nazi menace in the 30s". You certainly reckon that speeches about the communist menace are similar to those about the nazi menace.

why would i have to "reckon" so ? because it would be obvious in terms of the speech or because of the historical context?

[mogrovejo]

why would i have to "reckon" so ? because it would be obvious in terms of the speech or because of the historical context?

In the exact same context this speech reminded you of the speeches about the communist menace.

[rjv]

In the exact same context this speech reminded you of the speeches about the communist menace.

only if i felt that the red menace was comparable to the threat of the nazis which i obviously did and do not.