Author Topic: A real life Troll...........  (Read 448 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ZEGH8578

  • Idealist Nihilist Socialist Primitivist Anarchist
  • Elder
  • Obsessive Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 7548
  • Karma: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • NTWADUMELA
Re: A real life Troll...........
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2013, 09:23:31 AM »
It's almost like you are deliberately trolling me :think:

Don't you realize that I can't discuss with you, if you keep giving me opinions and statements I never made.
It's only gonna be a neverending

You: Argument
Me: I never said that
You: Argument
Me: I never said that
You: Argument
Me: I never said that

Untill you actually address what I say, and not what I would say if I fit your ideas of hipsters, hippies, activists, Obama-voters, etc.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2013, 09:25:02 AM by ZEGH8578 »

P7PSP

  • Guest
Re: A real life Troll...........
« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2013, 09:41:14 AM »
It's almost like you are deliberately trolling me :think:

Don't you realize that I can't discuss with you, if you keep giving me opinions and statements I never made.
It's only gonna be a neverending

You: Argument
Me: I never said that
You: Argument
Me: I never said that
You: Argument
Me: I never said that

Untill you actually address what I say, and not what I would say if I fit your ideas of hipsters, hippies, activists, Obama-voters, etc.
Bullshit. I called on you to provide references to prove your position, whereupon you admitted exaggerating to make a point then you claimed that I know perfectly well what you mean instead of just saying what you meant and backing it up the first time around.     

People. People said it.
I exaggerated the exact expression for a condensing effect, since people said a whole bunch of different things, it would take me hours to make an exact list of all the variations, especially if you want to include exact syntax from each individual statement.

But in all, from everyone commenting NK that I have seen, more than half commented on the nuclear capacity. The bulk of this half commented on wether or not it would be able to reach USA, and kept the debate at that. Several more dismissed all danger presented by NK, on the basis that it could not realistically harm the USA.

You know perfectly well what I mean.
And what does exaggerate mean?  :dunno:
thesaurus.com/browse/exaggeration

Offline ZEGH8578

  • Idealist Nihilist Socialist Primitivist Anarchist
  • Elder
  • Obsessive Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 7548
  • Karma: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • NTWADUMELA
Re: A real life Troll...........
« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2013, 09:52:17 AM »
You are nitpicking for the sake of argument, instead of seeing what it is I am trying to convey. I don't know if you do this on purpose, or just a need to nitpick. I nitpick as well.
What irks me however, is that you are quick to launch yourself on pre-imagined perceptions.

How often do I feel a need to MENTION your hillbilly gun toting shit kicking rednecky cowboyness?
Never?
Well, don't think it's because I consider you undeserving of such an epithet, but because it isn't relevant to what is being discussed there and then.
I smoke weed.
How does that diminish my capacity to know what North Korea can or cannot do? RETHORICAL QUESTION.

All I said is that people (yes, the myriads out there, including the stupid ones) tend to blow up the global-danger factor of North Korea.
While I can see that NK has the capacity for a lot of havoc, technically, a lot of countries have this capacity. *cough*USA*cough*
The MAIN issue with the North Korea vs South Korea war is: North and South Korea - not Alaska. It is the MILLIONS of Korean civilians, not the thousands of stationed American soldiers.
This does not mean I am unaware of the Americans stationed there.
Right?
With me so far?
This isn't even a matter to debate endlessly so... if you have something VITAL to add to this, be my guest...

P7PSP

  • Guest
Re: A real life Troll...........
« Reply #18 on: March 31, 2013, 10:23:53 AM »
You are nitpicking for the sake of argument, instead of seeing what it is I am trying to convey. I don't know if you do this on purpose, or just a need to nitpick. I nitpick as well.
What irks me however, is that you are quick to launch yourself on pre-imagined perceptions.
No actually I was asking you to back up your position.
Quote
How often do I feel a need to MENTION your hillbilly gun toting shit kicking rednecky cowboyness?
Never?
Well, don't think it's because I consider you undeserving of such an epithet, but because it isn't relevant to what is being discussed there and then.
:lol1:
Quote
I smoke weed.
How does that diminish my capacity to know what North Korea can or cannot do? RETHORICAL QUESTION.
Well since you are apparently operating at 100% I suppose I need explain to you that that part of the response was tit for tat since you presumed to know that I would never see your reply and put that little TL;DR sarcasm in there.
 
Quote
All I said is that people (yes, the myriads out there, including the stupid ones) tend to blow up the global-danger factor of North Korea.
While I can see that NK has the capacity for a lot of havoc, technically, a lot of countries have this capacity. *cough*USA*cough*
The MAIN issue with the North Korea vs South Korea war is: North and South Korea - not Alaska. It is the MILLIONS of Korean civilians, not the thousands of stationed American soldiers.
This does not mean I am unaware of the Americans stationed there.
Right?
With me so far?
This isn't even a matter to debate endlessly so... if you have something VITAL to add to this, be my guest...
That is apparently your main issue. That does not necessarily make it everyone's main issue now does it Mr Armchair Activist?  :tard:

Would you presume to tell Americans that they should not be concerned about the possibility of Korean nukes hitting Alaska, Hawaii or California? Or the potential loss of 28,000 citizens in short order followed by a nuclear showdown with the PRC that could lead to nuclear war?

Do you believe the PRCs main concern is the fate of the two Koreas if things should come to that? How about the Russian Federation? Would you want to tell them what their main concern will be in this situation?

If millions of Koreans die there is a good likelihood that millions of others will die too. It is natural that people will think of their own casualties first in a situation like that you preachy twat.

Offline ZEGH8578

  • Idealist Nihilist Socialist Primitivist Anarchist
  • Elder
  • Obsessive Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 7548
  • Karma: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • NTWADUMELA
Re: A real life Troll...........
« Reply #19 on: March 31, 2013, 10:30:59 AM »
PRC support for North Korean military action is extremely unlikely. This has been less known for a few years, and widely known for much shorter ammount of time.
PRC is interested in earning money, that we have, and that they want from us. Good old capitalism (joke intended). China needs us to stay healthy consumers, and they can't do that if everyone gets nuked, and they're not gonna risk that for fattie-kim-un. They simply aren't.
So it is safe enough to remove PRC from this equation.

NK is most likely gonna focus its military effort on SK rather than American pacific posessions, since SK is their main priority. The "US Imperialist" rethoric they're so fond of is mostly just theatre, to boost morale among the population.

I agree NK is a danger. But I must insist that NK is mainly a danger to its immediate surroundings, not the whole world, and not to US mainland. If a nuclear missile launched from NK even hits Hawaii, I'm gonna be more surprised at the American failure to intercept it, than anything else.
And any conventional attack on American posessions in the Pacific, as a preemptive measure, so to invade SK with more ease... I mean, come on, you might just as well worry that Taliban will invade your mainland.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2013, 10:33:47 AM by ZEGH8578 »

P7PSP

  • Guest
Re: A real life Troll...........
« Reply #20 on: March 31, 2013, 11:00:38 AM »
First off you did not address the points I just made. It does go directly to your use of assumptions and inexact language. 

PRC support for North Korean military action is extremely unlikely. This has been less known for a few years, and widely known for much shorter ammount of time.
PRC is interested in earning money, that we have, and that they want from us. Good old capitalism (joke intended). China needs us to stay healthy consumers, and they can't do that if everyone gets nuked, and they're not gonna risk that for fattie-kim-un. They simply aren't.
So it is safe enough to remove PRC from this equation.
Not if DPRK uses nukes and provokes a response in kind. I don't consider that to be a very likely at this time but assuming they won't would be a real shitty idea.
Quote
NK is most likely gonna focus its military effort on SK rather than American pacific posessions, since SK is their main priority. The "US Imperialist" rethoric they're so fond of is mostly just theatre, to boost morale among the population.
Unless the USA Out contigent in ROK prevails than an attack on ROK is going to bring the USA and other UN allies in. There are people over here who want to bring those troops home but they are not close to prevailing. 
Quote
I agree NK is a danger. But I must insist that NK is mainly a danger to its immediate surroundings, not the whole world, and not to US mainland. If a nuclear missile launched from NK even hits Hawaii, I'm gonna be more surprised at the American failure to intercept it, than anything else.
And any conventional attack on American posessions in the Pacific, as a preemptive measure, so to invade SK with more ease... I mean, come on, you might just as well worry that Taliban will invade your mainland.
I don't have much faith that their missiles are very good either but they have made the threats and those threats need to be investigated. ROK has about a 3:1 advantage population wise and a tough military. Therefore barring the use of nukes and possible PRC support I don't see a rational reason that Kim Jong Un would base a decision to invade on and I don't see why PRC would encourage such action. People cannot always be counted on to be rational though and I do believe that PRC likes to keep their rabid attack dog handy for a bellicose show.