Reply With Quote
Whatever. I'm comfortable with my posts.
I'm sure people are capable of reading for themselves. You were the only person who reversed their position.
The U. S. Government was complicit in two of the three crimes that led to the murder of 300+ Mexicans. I'm not a prosecutor and I wasn't addressing a court of law. It was an imprecise generalization of the overall scandal.
When you reversed yourself, after having it pointed out to you that you had actually agreed with my characterization, I clarified the point. I didn't back away. The U. S. is largely responsible for the deaths.
Whatever. I'm comfortable with my posts.
go ahead, muddy the waters after the fact. I don't care.
The cartels were "largely resposible" (wtf does that even mean?) for their deaths.
And, the cartels got their guns and free passage from the U. S. Government.
Okay, TeyshaBlue, let's say you had an AK-47 in the trunk of your car and, while standing next to a crazed murderer at a carnival, you heard him say, "if I had a ing gun I'd kill everyone in this place."
Do you, a) go to your trunk and get your AK-47 and had it to him or, b) do everything in your power to stop him from achieving that goal?
If you choose "a," does that make you "largely responsible" for what occurs next? I believe it does.
The U. S. Government, knowing the Mexican drug cartels were a bunch of crazed murderers, opened the gun shops, allowed the murderers guns, and let them walk back across the border with them -- to a predictable outcome.
Your straw scenario is predicated upon the premise that there is a single source of guns, which is not the case.
Failed analogy.
No, it doesn't. Being one of several or, the only source of guns, doesn't make you any less responsible for the murders committed with the guns you supplied.
If you give a gun to someone whom you know, in all likelihood, will use that gun to murder others -- regardless of who else is supplying them guns -- and that gun is used in a murder (as has been the case at least 300 times in Mexico) you're no less responsible just because there are other stupid people willing to arm the cartels.
I'm not claiming the U. S. is "largely responsible" for the tens of thousands of murders that have occurred at the hands of Mexican drug cartels...just the 300+ where Fast & Furious guns were used.
I dont take isuue with resposibility...its the degrees thereof wherein we diagree.
Then, we can just disagree. I'm not absolving this corrupt administration of any responsibility.
I don't know how many of those murders would not have occurred if the U. S. Government had not supplied the murderers with the guns used to commit them. And, neither do you.
This thread has become lest interesting than it was before.
Thanks for weighting in.
feel free to resume the previous one
Lest is best!
Why don't you just quit hijacking threads.
lol Yoni the relevance troll
the hijack would've died all on its own but for your petulant disavowals of the same
the thread was dead. I killed it, like I do so many others around here.
why did you reanimate it, Yoni? did you think you could rehabilitate your reputation?
Please, once you start ankle-biting you don't let go.
praise from the master. i'm humbled.
This and the subsequent three posts -- all from you goading me -- is what you call "killing a thread?"
I'll keep that in mind.
I thought of it more at the time as encouraging others to acquaint (or re-acquaint) themselves with your style of argumentation, but I can see how you would take it personal.This and the subsequent three posts -- all from you goading me -- is what you call "killing a thread?"
perhaps i didn't actually kill the thread. wishful thinking, I guess.
does that make me guilty of attempted murder, counselor?
see what he did there at the very end? Jim Marshall threw the ball away.
Life lessons, Yoni.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
