Total Posts:205|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why are Americans concerned about terrorism

lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2015 7:07:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
when they are killing each other everyday?

*This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2015 11:57:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/18/2015 7:07:42 PM, lamerde wrote:
when they are killing each other everyday?

*This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality.

Both are fair criticisms; fairly few people in the United States are killed on a yearly basis by terrorism while many Americans are killed by violent crimes. It is also true that many more black people are killed by fellow blacks than are killed by cops.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 12:08:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/18/2015 7:07:42 PM, lamerde wrote:
when they are killing each other everyday?

*This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality.

That's a pretty good analogy.
But, and it goes for both, it does depend on what exactly is being discussed, as sometimes, albeit rarely, those criticisms have merit.
My work here is, finally, done.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 12:41:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/18/2015 11:57:23 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 11/18/2015 7:07:42 PM, lamerde wrote:
when they are killing each other everyday?

*This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality.

Both are fair criticisms; fairly few people in the United States are killed on a yearly basis by terrorism while many Americans are killed by violent crimes. It is also true that many more black people are killed by fellow blacks than are killed by cops.

We actually have lost more soldiers in afghan plus Iraq wars than 9-11 civilians....
lotsoffun
Posts: 1,609
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 1:42:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/18/2015 7:07:42 PM, lamerde wrote:
when they are killing each other everyday?

*This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality.

They are concerned about terrorism because they were hoodwinked into believing they are constantly under threat so that the elites that run the U.S. can use fear to control the populace. eg. Homeland (Gestapo) Security and whatever they call their customs agency now. You know, the clowns who molest you at the airport if you don't want to get radiated.
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 4:15:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Black on black crime is predictable, the norm, and it is usually isolated to black-dominated neighborhoods.

Terrorism is arbitrary, unpredictable, and almost never contained to any particular area.

Pretty simple.
Tsar of DDO
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 6:24:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 4:15:43 AM, YYW wrote:
Black on black crime is predictable, the norm, and it is usually isolated to black-dominated neighborhoods.

Terrorism is arbitrary, unpredictable, and almost never contained to any particular area.

Pretty simple.

Do you even logic bro? The comparison is not between black-on-black crime and terrorism. It's been black-on-black crime and American-on-American crime.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 1:42:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I've never once suffered from black on black crime, though I have suffered from terrorism. It's caused me to have to get singled out for more thorough searches everytime I'm at the airport. Whoever the Fvck has put me on a list that gets me singled out when I go on planes, needs to take me the fvck off, if I ever find out who they are, I will destroy them.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 1:44:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 6:24:30 AM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 4:15:43 AM, YYW wrote:
Black on black crime is predictable, the norm, and it is usually isolated to black-dominated neighborhoods.

Terrorism is arbitrary, unpredictable, and almost never contained to any particular area.

Pretty simple.

Do you even logic bro? The comparison is not between black-on-black crime and terrorism. It's been black-on-black crime and American-on-American crime.

To be fair it's hard to comprehend WTF the op is about. It needs to show logic in the writing to be read with logic. Seriously this is awful writing that is hard to figure out what it is even about.
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 2:01:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 1:44:20 PM, Wylted wrote:

To be fair it's hard to comprehend WTF the op is about. It needs to show logic in the writing to be read with logic. Seriously this is awful writing that is hard to figure out what it is even about.

The logic in the OP is fine. The only people who couldn't comprehend it are you and YYW.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 2:22:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 2:01:45 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 1:44:20 PM, Wylted wrote:

The logic in the OP is fine. The only people who couldn't comprehend it are you and YYW.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 2:23:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 2:01:45 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 1:44:20 PM, Wylted wrote:

To be fair it's hard to comprehend WTF the op is about. It needs to show logic in the writing to be read with logic. Seriously this is awful writing that is hard to figure out what it is even about.

The logic in the OP is fine. The only people who couldn't comprehend it are you and YYW.

I wouldn't be sure about that. Is this your multi Vi_Spex?
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 3:44:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 2:23:02 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 2:01:45 PM, lamerde wrote:

The logic in the OP is fine. The only people who couldn't comprehend it are you and YYW.

I wouldn't be sure about that. Is this your multi Vi_Spex?

Let me break it down for you.

Why are A so concerned with B when A kill each other?

A = Americans
B = terrorism

Then I provide two concepts: police brutality and black-on-black-crime

Black-on-black crime refers to black people obvs.

How would the analogy work any other way, except:

A = black people
B = police brutality

The two populations are analogous and the two forms of violence are analogous. It would take a serious leap in logic to have it the other way but I'm curious how you came to that conclusion.

Moreover, I said "This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality."

This is how you sound when you say D in response to E.

D = Black-on-black crime
E = criticisms of police brutality

"Why are Americans concerned about terrorism when they are killing each other everyday?"

A (Americans) do E (criticize terrorism), like A (black people) do E (criticize police brutality). No one says why do you care about E (terrorism) when D (Americans kill each other). Yet there is a contradiction, because people say this about black people and police brutality.

TL;DR -
terrorism is to Americans as police brutality is to black people

Personally, I think this post is more confusing. The OP is very straightforward.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 4:20:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 3:44:06 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 2:23:02 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 2:01:45 PM, lamerde wrote:

The logic in the OP is fine. The only people who couldn't comprehend it are you and YYW.

I wouldn't be sure about that. Is this your multi Vi_Spex?

Let me break it down for you.

Why are A so concerned with B when A kill each other?

A = Americans
B = terrorism

Then I provide two concepts: police brutality and black-on-black-crime

Black-on-black crime refers to black people obvs.

How would the analogy work any other way, except:

A = black people
B = police brutality

The two populations are analogous and the two forms of violence are analogous. It would take a serious leap in logic to have it the other way but I'm curious how you came to that conclusion.

Moreover, I said "This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality."

This is how you sound when you say D in response to E.

D = Black-on-black crime
E = criticisms of police brutality

"Why are Americans concerned about terrorism when they are killing each other everyday?"

A (Americans) do E (criticize terrorism), like A (black people) do E (criticize police brutality). No one says why do you care about E (terrorism) when D (Americans kill each other). Yet there is a contradiction, because people say this about black people and police brutality.

TL;DR -
terrorism is to Americans as police brutality is to black people

Personally, I think this post is more confusing. The OP is very straightforward.

The analogies don't really work though, for several reasons. One is for the reason that YYW brought up. The other is because internal threats should obviously be handled differently than external threats. Another reason the analogy doesn't work is because of the fact that police brutality isn't really as widespread or as common as people like to think. Are cops dick s?Generally speaking yes, when they're a dick to black people, a lot of blacks will assume racism, when they do it to me, I just assume they're dick sMaybe if I was black, I'd think exactly like they do, so I'm not blaming them, our views are often colored by our experiences. Cops are dick s and thugs, period.
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 4:54:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 4:20:43 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 3:44:06 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 2:23:02 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 2:01:45 PM, lamerde wrote:

The logic in the OP is fine. The only people who couldn't comprehend it are you and YYW.

I wouldn't be sure about that. Is this your multi Vi_Spex?

Let me break it down for you.

Why are A so concerned with B when A kill each other?

A = Americans
B = terrorism

Then I provide two concepts: police brutality and black-on-black-crime

Black-on-black crime refers to black people obvs.

How would the analogy work any other way, except:

A = black people
B = police brutality

The two populations are analogous and the two forms of violence are analogous. It would take a serious leap in logic to have it the other way but I'm curious how you came to that conclusion.

Moreover, I said "This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality."

This is how you sound when you say D in response to E.

D = Black-on-black crime
E = criticisms of police brutality

"Why are Americans concerned about terrorism when they are killing each other everyday?"

A (Americans) do E (criticize terrorism), like A (black people) do E (criticize police brutality). No one says why do you care about E (terrorism) when D (Americans kill each other). Yet there is a contradiction, because people say this about black people and police brutality.

TL;DR -
terrorism is to Americans as police brutality is to black people

Personally, I think this post is more confusing. The OP is very straightforward.

The analogies don't really work though, for several reasons. One is for the reason that YYW brought up. The other is because internal threats should obviously be handled differently than external threats. Another reason the analogy doesn't work is because of the fact that police brutality isn't really as widespread or as common as people like to think. Are cops dick s?Generally speaking yes, when they're a dick to black people, a lot of blacks will assume racism, when they do it to me, I just assume they're dick sMaybe if I was black, I'd think exactly like they do, so I'm not blaming them, our views are often colored by our experiences. Cops are dick s and thugs, period.

No, I think the analogy does work. YYW wasn't deconstructing the analogy, he was merely answering the example question at face value-- two different things. Terrorism IS an internal threat. And, analogous to police brutality, terrorism isn't as widespread or as common as people like to think.

Not only is the "black on black" crime thing a pathetic red herring re: police brutality, it ignores the fact that the police are charged with protecting the citizens, not brutalizing/killing them. Criminals, on the other hand, can be totally expected to hurt and kill people, as is consistent with the nature of criminality.

It is rather sad when it has to be all spelled out...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
No, I think the analogy does work. YYW wasn't deconstructing the analogy, he was merely answering the example question at face value-- two different things. Terrorism IS an internal threat. And, analogous to police brutality, terrorism isn't as widespread or as common as people like to think.

Okay cool. Yes an internal threat that comes from the outside. Just like the right wing propaganda that creates domestic terrorists is probably coming from and being funded by foreign governments. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin was directly funding the Alex Jones propaganda machine.

Not only is the "black on black" crime thing a pathetic red herring re: police brutality, it ignores the fact that the police are charged with protecting the citizens, not brutalizing/killing them. Criminals, on the other hand, can be totally expected to hurt and kill people, as is consistent with the nature of criminality.

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

It is rather sad when it has to be all spelled out...

Yes, things need to be spelled out. We don't all share the same culture, presuppositions and world view. It's kind of stupid to think that everyone shares those presuppositions, culture and world view with you. Some spelling out is necessary when an international or multinational conversation is taking place.
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:10:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I was in class when I wrote this so I fixed the syllogism below (bold and underlined).

At 11/19/2015 3:44:06 PM, lamerde wrote:

Moreover, I said "This is how you sound when you say "black on black crime" in response to criticisms of police brutality."

This is how you sound when you say D in response to E.

D = Black-on-black crime
E = criticisms of police brutality

"Why are Americans concerned about terrorism when they are killing each other everyday?"

A (Americans) do E (criticize terrorism), like A (black people) do E (criticize police brutality). No one says why do you care about B (terrorism) when D (Americans kill each other). Yet there is a contradiction, because people say this about black people and police brutality.

TL;DR -
terrorism is to Americans as police brutality is to black people

Personally, I think this post is more confusing. The OP is very straightforward.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:23:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.

I did that to prove the point, that your post can be interpreted 100 different ways, that it needs to be elaborated on, and you can ask your mom if I'm anti-black
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:27:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:23:53 PM, Wylted wrote:

I did that to prove the point, that your post can be interpreted 100 different ways, that it needs to be elaborated on, and you can ask your mom if I'm anti-black

The only thing you proved is that you didn't understand my argument, not that it could be interpreted 100 different ways. For further instruction, please refer to my post that details the logical syllogism.

I made zero arguments about terrorism in the OP. I presented an analogy.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:30:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:23:53 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.

I did that to prove the point, that your post can be interpreted 100 different ways, that it needs to be elaborated on, and you can ask your mom if I'm anti-black

Wylted, quit playing dumb. A lot things "can" be interpreted in 100 different ways, but there's also less and more plausible interpretations. Your interpretation is really improbable given the context. The most straightforward and plausible interpretation is the one lamerde was aiming for.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:35:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:30:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:23:53 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.

I did that to prove the point, that your post can be interpreted 100 different ways, that it needs to be elaborated on, and you can ask your mom if I'm anti-black

Wylted, quit playing dumb. A lot things "can" be interpreted in 100 different ways, but there's also less and more plausible interpretations. Your interpretation is really improbable given the context. The most straightforward and plausible interpretation is the one lamerde was aiming for.

I am not going to quit playing dumb. This is an international audience and it needs to be kept in mind when writing. There is a reason I have used "there is" and "I am" in this post instead of "there's" and "I'm". One way is more easily understandable to an international audience, and the other is exclusive. Either you want to facilitate a more inclusive and intellectually driven environment or you want to see DDO, continue in it's current course.
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:39:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.

Yep... while you attempted a cogent analogy to get people to see a whole other issue in a different way, it seems that the chasm is still too big to be crossed this way. Imagine how much worse it would be if racism hadn't been successfully abolished from our society (according to the deluded)?
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:42:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:39:55 PM, Fly wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.

Yep... while you attempted a cogent analogy to get people to see a whole other issue in a different way, it seems that the chasm is still too big to be crossed this way. Imagine how much worse it would be if racism hadn't been successfully abolished from our society (according to the deluded)?

It's impossible to eradicate it completely, just as it is impossible to eliminate those people prejudiced against green eyes. So they are deluded.
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:48:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:35:09 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:30:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:23:53 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

It's not me saying we should ignore terrorism; my attempt at trolling just failed because the people who responded are so deluded.

I did that to prove the point, that your post can be interpreted 100 different ways, that it needs to be elaborated on, and you can ask your mom if I'm anti-black

Wylted, quit playing dumb. A lot things "can" be interpreted in 100 different ways, but there's also less and more plausible interpretations. Your interpretation is really improbable given the context. The most straightforward and plausible interpretation is the one lamerde was aiming for.

I am not going to quit playing dumb. This is an international audience and it needs to be kept in mind when writing. There is a reason I have used "there is" and "I am" in this post instead of "there's" and "I'm". One way is more easily understandable to an international audience, and the other is exclusive. Either you want to facilitate a more inclusive and intellectually driven environment or you want to see DDO, continue in it's current course.

Yes, because if there's one thing DDO needs in order to improve its discourse, it is more ignorant, opinionated posters with poor reading comprehension and poor critical thinking skills...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:51:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:39:55 PM, Fly wrote:

Yep... while you attempted a cogent analogy to get people to see a whole other issue in a different way, it seems that the chasm is still too big to be crossed this way. Imagine how much worse it would be if racism hadn't been successfully abolished from our society (according to the deluded)?

lol my initial plan was to not even respond to anyone in the thread in the first place, and just continue to post contradictions. I would start by saying something absolutely ridiculous (like the thread title) and follow it up with *this is how you sound when...

Unfortunately, I was not expecting people to agree with the analogy at face value. LOL
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 5:56:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:35:09 PM, Wylted wrote:

I am not going to quit playing dumb. This is an international audience and it needs to be kept in mind when writing. There is a reason I have used "there is" and "I am" in this post instead of "there's" and "I'm". One way is more easily understandable to an international audience, and the other is exclusive. Either you want to facilitate a more inclusive and intellectually driven environment or you want to see DDO, continue in it's current course.

Oh really, is that how you consider an international audience? Tell me more.

Is English not your (or YYW's) first language? Anyhoo, there's language and then there's logic. As far as I can tell, you both missed the mark with the latter.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2015 6:08:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/19/2015 5:13:38 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 11/19/2015 5:03:11 PM, Wylted wrote:

I don't disagree with it being a red herring, but I think the ops argument that we should ignore terrorism is stupid, and using the police brutality argument to support his position is even dumber.

Absolutely, that is NOT my argument. I'm just as surprised as you are that the first few responses in the thread have people whose anti-Blackness is so strong they would rather be okay with terrorism than admit it's possible to care about two things (and that the two are not mutually exclusive).

You're straw-manning their position. They're not "okay with terrorism". They're saying that both terrorism and police brutality are enormously overblown threats, especially relative to vastly more prevalent problems that plague society. The OP is essentially based in a misunderstanding of the "black-on-black crime" response. It's not an attempt at dismissing the problem via red herring -- it's just observing that "hey, this isn't even close to the biggest problem black people face, so maybe we shouldn't be giving it as much attention as we are"