Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
What was offensive with my contribution? Did you understand anything I wrote?
by Euroliberal on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 06:58:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, insulting my intelligence is an excellent way to proceed.  Please continue.  Would you like to call me ugly, too?
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 08:54:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You get insulted very easily. Too bad. It wasn't my intention to insult or offend you neither in my first nor in my second comment.
If that's how it sounded, I apologise.

Shouldn't it be me that feeling offended by your response? After all, you said that my comment was drying some well... and was not civil.

If you are honest, point out ONE reference in my original comment that lacked civility. One instance that I used anything but facts.

Did you disagree? Make your case.
You disagreed with two consecutive posts without offering any counterarguments. At least explain what in particular offends you. We may come to agree or disagree which is what dialogue is supposed to do.

by Euroliberal on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 10:11:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, you inserted yourself into the discussion by implying that I personally am immature ("take it like a big boy") because I took exception to being told that I personally (as a member of the group "Americans") "will not allow other nations their dignity."

After calling me a child, you then proceeded to repeat the original poster's error of over-generalizing.  Your words were:

Americans (and not just the govt) are not free of guilt. They've shown repeatedly that it takes but a small effort for them to accept other people as "enemies".

Please note that you did not say "some Americans" or even "most Americans."  You said "Americans."

In your third post, you asked if I failed to understand what you wrote.  No, in fact, it appears to be you who failed to understand what you wrote.

In short:  I was objecting to the original poster's choice of words, not to the sentiment that she was expressing.  You jumped in with a new set of insults.  I then objected to your choice of words, not to the sentiment you were expressing.

You, however, seem awfully eager to believe that I have some problem with people criticizing my country, which would conveniently confirm all of your pre-conceived notions about me.

I can assure you, however, that if that were true, I would not live where I live.

I really suggest at this point that you should move on.  There is nothing to be seen here.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 11:07:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
your last sentence says it all.

You finally posted a coherent (but factually wrong) response but you feel like my side, my arguments do not deserve the same consideration as yours.

I think you just broke a lot of forum etiquete rules and demonstrated that you have little respect for differing opinions.

by Euroliberal on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 11:24:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have said nothing, not one word, about the opinions expressed by either you or by Gaianne.  I have objected to the fact that you both insist on over-generalizing.  I do not expect that kind of intellectual laziness in this forum.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 11:37:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
but.... but you never asked me to qualify, clarify or otherwise explain my positions.

The only thing you did was ad hominem attacks based on some assumption that you chose to make.

by Euroliberal on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 12:04:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
OK, fine, be my guest.  Pull up a chair, have a cup of tea, and qualify, clarify or otherwise explain to your heart's content.

Feel better now?

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 12:40:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
thank you anyway.

I wish you the best. Peace.

by Euroliberal on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 01:58:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
BTW, stormy, the irony of this spat of yours is that Gaianne, who set this off, is American herself.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 04:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
:)  Hehe.  I do realize that....  But Americans don't get a free pass when it comes to making generalizations, even about ourselves.  It doesn't matter if we're from Michigan, Madrid or Mars!
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 04:55:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think she meant to make a generalisation (because I don't think she includes herself in that characterisation of behaviour), just used generalising language, which can be misunderstood all too easily.

BTW, I once got a letter published in Newsweek in which I blasted them for generalising language. (And the crooks re-edited some words central to my points.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 05:16:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think the media should be taken to task for it a lot more often.  But then, I guess on the list of things we have to complain about regarding the media, that may not even be in the top five...
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Fri Feb 3rd, 2006 at 06:04:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display: