Are people who died in Vietnam "Draft Dodgers"

[jj]

I will not be a party to you Ad Hominem until you start provided sources and facts to back up your endless drivel.

I quoted you in context. You said exactly what I reported, in context. You now claim not to have meant such a horrid thing. Why not just apologize to all the thousands of families you deeply insulted (does it apply to WW2, too, make that millions) and get it over with.

Nobody reads your mind, Merphie, we have no idea what you intended, only what you said. What you said was simple, clear, and explicit. It was also an appalling statement, showing just how far someone would go to attack the better presidential candidate.

You indeed represent everything that Prescott and 'W' stand for, Merphie, but not in the way you think.

 

[merphie]

I quoted you in context. You said exactly what I reported, in context. You now claim not to have meant such a horrid thing. Why not just apologize to all the thousands of families you deeply insulted (does it apply to WW2, too, make that millions) and get it over with.

Nobody reads your mind, Merphie, we have no idea what you intended, only what you said. What you said was simple, clear, and explicit. It was also an appalling statement, showing just how far someone would go to attack the better presidential candidate.

You indeed represent everything that Prescott and 'W' stand for, Merphie, but not in the way you think.

You don't have to read my mind because the words were yours. The good people on the board asked for clarification before jumping to conclusions.

If you had one inch of respect, you would have done the same. Instead you jumped into a personal attack on me for something I didn't mean.

You continue the personal attacks even this far after it has be explained more times than I care to count.

So I will quit wasting my time of thise subject because you will continue to make it into whatever you want it to be.

 

[CFLarsen]

No I can't blame anyone for not precieving my statements as I intended. I have not done so. What I can do is blame those who go off on personal attacks without asking for clarification.

I have not flip flopped on anything and could never come close to Kerry's record. I have provided plenty of sources along with other people. You and JJ have not answered any of them.

My I suggest you actually present a debate with facts instead of personal attacks and accusations?

May I suggest that you actually flip-flopped on this issue? You said one thing, now you say you didn't mean it.

I don't see that as a personal attack at all. It is only referring to the facts.

 

[jj]

You don't have to read my mind because the words were yours. The good people on the board asked for clarification before jumping to conclusions.


I see, the 'good people' are ones who don't take your words at face value, then. So, tell me, why do you speak in code?


If you had one inch of respect, you would have done the same. Instead you jumped into a personal attack on me for something I didn't mean.


You suggested that people who died in Vietnam were draft dodgers. I have exactly ZERO respect for anyone who says something like that, and it's just what you said.


You continue the personal attacks even this far after it has be explained more times than I care to count.


I have recited the facts. Calling a simple, obvious recitation of the facts "personal attacks" is unjustified on your part, and quite ironically constitutes a personal attack on me.


So I will quit wasting my time of thise subject because you will continue to make it into whatever you want it to be.

I'd suggest you spend more time saying what you actually mean in the future, if you didn't intend what you said. I'm still not convinced that you didn't intend what you said, though, I think you just might not have taken your assertion to its conclusion.

After all, suggesting that someone with 3 purple hearts and a silver star dodged the draft, when in fact he volunteered, is only a very thin line from outright lying, and that's your backup position, Merphie, that's your backup position.

No, what happened is simple, you tried for a nasty little sound bite, and I showed the readership here just what your nasty little sound bite actually meant. You were careless, arrogant, and obscenely partisan, and you got caught out on all three, I guess. (I'll give you the courtesy of assuming that you were careless, and that you are actually telling the truth when you say that you didn't mean what you said. It would be wise of you to apologize to all the families who had a soldier lost in a war, now, thank you.

 

[merphie]

May I suggest that you actually flip-flopped on this issue? You said one thing, now you say you didn't mean it.

I don't see that as a personal attack at all. It is only referring to the facts.

Suggest all you want. It wasn't my intention to make the meaning JJ is claiming.

 

[merphie]

I'd suggest you spend more time saying what you actually mean in the future, if you didn't intend what you said. I'm still not convinced that you didn't intend what you said, though, I think you just might not have taken your assertion to its conclusion.

After all, suggesting that someone with 3 purple hearts and a silver star dodged the draft, when in fact he volunteered, is only a very thin line from outright lying, and that's your backup position, Merphie, that's your backup position.

No, what happened is simple, you tried for a nasty little sound bite, and I showed the readership here just what your nasty little sound bite actually meant. You were careless, arrogant, and obscenely partisan, and you got caught out on all three, I guess. (I'll give you the courtesy of assuming that you were careless, and that you are actually telling the truth when you say that you didn't mean what you said. It would be wise of you to apologize to all the families who had a soldier lost in a war, now, thank you.

No you made the nasty sound bite. I have explained the reasoning for it.

This is nothing more than a personal attack on me which you insist on continuing. I refuse to apologize for something I have not done.

No answer I give will satisfy your blood thirst. I will have no more part of it.

 

[CFLarsen]

Suggest all you want. It wasn't my intention to make the meaning JJ is claiming.

Can I suggest that you think a bit more about your posts in the future?

 

[merphie]

Can I suggest that you think a bit more about your posts in the future?

As you wish. You make it sound as though I did it on purpose. It was purely an accident for it to sound that way. That was not my intent or point. I will try to refrain from making simple mistakes that perfect people on Planet X would never do. I sure no one else has made such a simple mistake on this board.

I have explained this many times over. JJ has simply ignored everything else so he can further his personal attack on me. There is not answer I could give that would satisfy his delusions. In my opinion JJ ran here after I tried to clear up the misunderstanding on the other thread because he is not able to discredit my other claims and evidence.

JJ is now on ignore as I will not longer participate in this ignorant charge. Something like this happens every time someone can not defend themself on a rational debate.

 

[CFLarsen]

merphie,

By now, I think it is obvious that you did not do it on purpose.

You just didn't think.

Whatever your beef with jj is, it has nothing to do with me.

 

[Rob Lister]

As you wish. You make it sound as though I did it on purpose.

It was more than a cheap shot, IMO. It's yet another view into jj's mindset. I really don't think he can help it. You shouldn't put him on ignore though. Some of his posts are very entertaining inasmuch as they illustrate how even obvious logic can go far astray.

You are in the right.

jj is in the wrong.

par for the course.

 

[merphie]

merphie,

By now, I think it is obvious that you did not do it on purpose.

You just didn't think.

Whatever your beef with jj is, it has nothing to do with me.

I did think. It didn't come out as it was intended. If I had made the two sentences into two paragraphs it would have illustrated as two different thoughts. Maybe a little more detail should have been added.

I can not see into the future and determine what meaning people are going to derive from my statements.

I don't have beef with JJ. I just don't want to waste my time. You had something to do with him because you were pandering to his point of view.

 

[merphie]

It was more than a cheap shot, IMO. It's yet another view into jj's mindset. I really don't think he can help it. You shouldn't put him on ignore though. Some of his posts are very entertaining inasmuch as they illustrate how even obvious logic can go far astray.

You are in the right.

jj is in the wrong.

par for the course.

Yes JJ has a lot of membership to his group. It is just a waste of my time to even read his responses as they rarely say anything meaningful.

He reminds me of Monty Python with they guy who went in for an argument. I can have the same kind of discussions with my kids.

 

[jj]

It was more than a cheap shot, IMO. It's yet another view into jj's mindset. I really don't think he can help it. You shouldn't put him on ignore though. Some of his posts are very entertaining inasmuch as they illustrate how even obvious logic can go far astray.

You are in the right.

jj is in the wrong.

par for the course.

This is neither civil nor true.

 

[jj]

I did think. It didn't come out as it was intended. If I had made the two sentences into two paragraphs it would have illustrated as two different thoughts. Maybe a little more detail should have been added.

Thank you. Why did that take so long?

 

[CFLarsen]

You had something to do with him because you were pandering to his point of view.

Ah, Ye Olde Conspiracy CopOut....

Sorry to burst your bubble: I was not pandering to anybody's view. I have a mind of my own.

 

[merphie]

Ah, Ye Olde Conspiracy CopOut....

Sorry to burst your bubble: I was not pandering to anybody's view. I have a mind of my own.

It's strange. Because you went from accusing me of the same thing twice, to accusing me of a "Flip-Flop" twice, to not thinking, and finally to I should consider my words better.

Now if you have read the other thread you would already have seen that I have answered the question and expressed myself clearly.

It appears you merely rephrased the same ideas JJ had.

No cop out. No bubble. Truth.

It doesn't matter now as I consider the matter close.

 

[Skeptic]

"Kerry fits into the draft dodger category as well. He didn't serve a full term in country."

By this logic, anyone who died in the war didn't complete their term "in country", with perhaps some few odd exceptions.

You missed the REAL point your opponent was trying to make, jj.

You correctly figured out that in their sneaky way, they use the term "draft dodger" to apply to anybody who avoided a full tour in Vietnam, living OR dead, for whatever reason. But you understand the full implication of your opponent's nefarious claims.

Under the cover of claiming he talks about Kerry's Vietnam's service, your oppoent's REAL point was that George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were cowardly draft dodgers because they haven't served in Vietnam.

Yes, they both had the excuse of being long dead at the time, but since (in your infinite wisdom) you discovered that being KIA-ed is no obstacle to being declared a "draft dodger", surely merely being dead is no obstacle, either.

The bastard, smearing Lincoln and Washington like that! Disgusting.

P.S.

Even when it comes to formal logic, you are wrong. KIA and draft dodger are mutually exclusive, like "prime" and "divisible by 4". You can be neither, of course, but not both.

 

[jj]

Even when it comes to formal logic, you are wrong. KIA and draft dodger are mutually exclusive, like "prime" and "divisible by 4". You can be neither, of course, but not both.

How dare you tell me I'm wrong. It's Merphie's idea, not mine, that you object to.

Just had to pile on with the rest of the rat pack, eh?

 

[Kerberos]

How dare you tell me I'm wrong. It's Merphie's idea, not mine, that you object to.

No it is not Merphie's idea, it is your straw man based on you ridiculous hyper literalist interpretation of what Merphie said. Even if Merphie's statement had been unclear this discussion would have been ridiculous after Merphie had clarified. It is not unclear however; it is immediately obvious to anybody with even the most basic intelligence that Merphie was referring to people who terminated their stay in Vietnam voluntarily. Now terminating you stay in Vietnam voluntarily obviously doesn't make you a draft dodger either, unless you at the very least twisted the rules, but that doesn’t justify attacking some obvious straw man.

 

[Skeptic]

How dare you tell me I'm wrong. It's Merphie's idea, not mine, that you object to.

(Yawn)

No, it's not. Merphie and his readers understand that the term "draft dodger" could not possibly include those KIA. Merphie didn't NEED to explicitly say the term "draft dodger" does not apply to KIAs, because anybody who knows what the term means at all, already KNOWS that.

It is only you who does not understand, or more likely pretends not to understand, what the term "draft dodger" means.
What you have proven by pretending not to understand simple English is beyound me.