posted
Blayne, I'm not Tom. However, I'm pretty sure Tom is asking Orincoro to cool it because...
A) He thinks Orincoro generally behaves with basic decency and avoids using too much profanity or going off on huge whiny rants, and...
B) Even more importantly, he thinks Orincoro might actually listen to him, and dial his venom back a notch.
You've already proven in this thread that neither A nor B seem to apply to you.
The fact that Tom did not, at this moment, ask you to behave, does not in some way validate your behavior thus far.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
I'm actually with Blayne on his initial point, that it's cool to see this sort of symbolic gesture of friendship between Russia and the West. Especially after some of the ill-considered rhetoric tossed around during the Russia-Georgia conflict (ahem John "We Are All Georgians" McCain).
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blayne: when you think you're insulting someone effectively by referencing TV Tropes, you are not. Please treat this as a truism.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Blayne, I'm not Tom. However, I'm pretty sure Tom is asking Orincoro to cool it because...
A) He thinks Orincoro generally behaves with basic decency and avoids using too much profanity or going off on huge whiny rants, and...
B) Even more importantly, he thinks Orincoro might actually listen to him, and dial his venom back a notch.
You've already proven in this thread that neither A nor B seem to apply to you.
The fact that Tom did not, at this moment, ask you to behave, does not in some way validate your behavior thus far.
I think to an extant it does as my primary issue had in fact been Orincolo's behavior and him asking him to cool it supports my complaint that Orincolo had been acting in a completely unjustified manner.
You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so by people with the maturity of 4chan users and should come to no surprise if you try everything in your power to insult and poke someone with a short fuse what do you expect?
Janitor doesn't police the threads often enough to prevent people from acting like dicks and swearing is the only way to get his attention that yes people are acting like dicks to me.
IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Blayne: when you think you're insulting someone effectively by referencing TV Tropes, you are not. Please treat this as a truism.
The hell you talking about. The only obscure reference I used as an insult is from Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: You're a troll.
Your posts belie this fact.
For your amusement:
quote:--Lisa if your not going to even both posting in the discussion page then dont edit out my contribution its rude.-- [[User:Blayne-T383|Blayne-T383]] 21:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
quote: You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so by people with the maturity of 4chan users and should come to no surprise if you try everything in your power to insult and poke someone with a short fuse what do you expect?
Take a look back at the sequence of posts there little buddy. I asked how you couldn't see the cynicism in the act, or how you could ignore it, and you responded by saying I didn't even have a right to comment.
"Waaawwaaawaaa they provoked me" is the excuse I get from my 7 year old students when I catch them kicking each other in the head because one of them said the other was smelly. Are you 7? Or are you a reality show contestant who knows they can get attention by flying off the handle at the slightest afront to your supposed dignity because we should all know how very delicate and sensitive your ego is, and we should all laud your "participation" as the work of genius you so clearly believe it to be? Or are you angry because your shilling for mass murderers does, somewhere in your addled brain, strike you as the slightest bit off-key?
Posts: 79 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: You should at least understand that I do not act this way because I like it only because I am unjustly provoked into doing so by people with the maturity of 4chan users and should come to no surprise if you try everything in your power to insult and poke someone with a short fuse what do you expect?
"You should at least understand that the way I act is never really MY fault; I blame others!"
quote:Janitor doesn't police the threads often enough to prevent people from acting like dicks and swearing is the only way to get his attention that yes people are acting like dicks to me.
posted
Put another way, why do you give the people who provoke you so much power over you?
Because look, let's say for the sake of argument that you're entirely right about your behavior being totally provoked and not so bad anyway, that you're being persecuted and whatnot. That there are some jerks who go out of their way to hound you.
If all of that is true, why let them wind you up so badly? Seriously. From your perspective, you flipping out is obviously one of the goals of antagonizing you...so why do it so reliably?
That's not reverse psychology, that's an honest question. If you're right, Samprimary, Orincoro, et al, are targeting you. If that's true, don't you realize your reactions are exactly the kind of thing they'd be going for?
When are the things you say going to be your responsibility, Blayne? In all the years you've been on Hatrack, it's almost always someone else's fault.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Guys, do you honestly think anything you say is going to infiltrate Blayne's world view?
You've told him all this before.
I can't believe that you haven't yet figured out that the way to make Blayne listen to you is to put it up on TV Tropes instead of actually posting it. I really suggest you try it, it could be like having your own Hatrack puppet if you work it well enough.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's more of a case of 'sometimes you grow up, but only in tiny, tiny steps, which aren't noticeable until you take a few months break from reading your threads'.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ill-considered only because we don't actually care very much if Russia rolls into Georgia or not.
Nor should we. There are plenty of bigger world problems we could put a dent in, that don't involve messing with the only force in the world that could destroy the United States in a single day.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Nor should we. There are plenty of bigger world problems we could put a dent in, that don't involve messing with the only force in the world that could destroy the United States in a single day.
Well, at least you're honest about it. I am curious, though, what other world problems would you be in favor of 'putting a dent in' and when would you be in favor of doing so?
We're writing off every nation bordering the PRC and Russia, presumably, so what does that leave?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Surely it's possible to write off Georgia without writing off, say, Poland or, indeed, Norway? Norway does, as it happens, have a land and sea border with Russia - a strategically important one, in fact. And, in what may not be a complete coincidence with regards to timing, just signed an agreement with Russia finally compromising on the long-standing - 40 years! - issue of how the Barents Sea border should run.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it possible? Certainly. That's just pragmatism. But the justification Destineer was using for Georgia applies to a lot of nations we aren't going to ignore, so I question its morality.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Nor should we. There are plenty of bigger world problems we could put a dent in, that don't involve messing with the only force in the world that could destroy the United States in a single day.
Well, at least you're honest about it. I am curious, though, what other world problems would you be in favor of 'putting a dent in' and when would you be in favor of doing so?
We're writing off every nation bordering the PRC and Russia, presumably, so what does that leave?
Darfur and Africa in general, the usual list of trouble spots I guess.
If Georgia were some sort of democratic utopia (like Norway!), I'd feel differently.
Also, China is nowhere near the threat Russia could be. They have a no-first-use policy, and don't use nuclear weapons as political tools to anywhere near the extent that the US and Russia do.
Preventing any chance of nuclear war should be the highest priority for the US, as Reagan understood later in his term. It's far more important than helping fair-weather allies who only pretend to share our ideals.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if you'd actually favor using military force in places like those - because that is absolutely what would be required - then I don't see an inconsistency and withdraw my objection on that basis. It's not an idea I hear supported much, though I wish it were.
As for nuclear war...preventing any chance is impossible. The weapons are there. The chance exists, and the safeguards are actually pretty damn crappy on the other side sometimes. How far do you bend over backwards in the name of preventing nuclear war? Not so far as to let Norway be invaded, apparently...but Georgia? I guess they're just not fortunate enough to have been separated long enough from the USSR to really have gotten going.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well, if you'd actually favor using military force in places like those - because that is absolutely what would be required - then I don't see an inconsistency and withdraw my objection on that basis.
If we had the troops to send, I'd definitely support it. Right now we're stretched pretty thin.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:And that the whole Soviet threat post-WW2 on was trumped up by evil conservatives and McCarthy.
But this part is actually true. Okay, maybe not "evil conservatives" but certainly McCarthyism. Do you really think McCarthyism favored a rational, realistic worldview?
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:And that the whole Soviet threat post-WW2 on was trumped up by evil conservatives and McCarthy.
But this part is actually true. Okay, maybe not "evil conservatives" but certainly McCarthyism. Do you really think McCarthyism favored a rational, realistic worldview?
I don't like McCarthy's methods. I don't necessarily think his concerns were unjustified, however.
I especially don't think that the Soviet Union (or Communism in a larger sense) was somehow not really a very significant threat.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: How far do you bend over backwards in the name of preventing nuclear war? Not so far as to let Norway be invaded, apparently...but Georgia? I guess they're just not fortunate enough to have been separated long enough from the USSR to really have gotten going.
I must say I doubt Russia would have gone nuclear over Georgia; but really, can one not recognise that the US has interests like any other country, but no commitment to the most pure abstractions of justice? What interest required American intervention in the Georgian conflict, at a time when US troops were pretty thinly stretched anyway? Besides that, is it so obvious that Russia was in the wrong?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:But this part is actually true. Okay, maybe not "evil conservatives" but certainly McCarthyism. Do you really think McCarthyism favored a rational, realistic worldview?
I think two things. One, I think McCarthyism went too far. Two, I think we won't be able to accurately gauge just how much too far they went for at least another decade or two. I think there's a reason such a crappy, broken political and economic system as the Soviet Union lasted four generations, and I don't think it owed to the sheer pluck and gumption of the Soviet government. I think a lot of the reason owed to espionage, and a calculated, long-term approach to espionage that we Americans seem to have a difficult time understanding. Then again the same can be said for foreign, economic, and domestic policy, and it can't be said only of Americans.
quote:I must say I doubt Russia would have gone nuclear over Georgia; but really, can one not recognise that the US has interests like any other country, but no commitment to the most pure abstractions of justice? What interest required American intervention in the Georgian conflict, at a time when US troops were pretty thinly stretched anyway? Besides that, is it so obvious that Russia was in the wrong?
I doubt 'Russia' would have gone nuclear over Georgia anymore than I doubt the United States would over anything other than a nuclear explosion or missiles already in the air.
If one is approaching the situation purely in terms of realpolitik style thinking, I don't have a beef with that. But if we're going to, say, be against tyranny and injustice in Africa as Destineer (and I, for that matter) say we ought to be, where is our duty to be against it everywhere?
As for whether Russia was wrong, well, I think they were wrong but I recognize there's plenty of wriggle room for both sides. But I also think Europe has had quite enough of Russian influence over its neighbors too, which means that when in doubt, I lean away from Russia.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
