Dixie

Oh, I was comparing chicken salad to chicken shit. That explains it all. :rolleyes:

The people of South Ossetia have declared their independence and they have "done it." Apparently, you believe in secession so long as it is convenient for you, like when it allows you to own black people. Otherwise, no.
 
like when it allows you to own black people.
Click to expand...

LOL... Now you want to talk about the War Between the States? The issue was not about 'owning black people' because that had been established by the US government as law at the time, it wasn't illegal and hadn't been illegal to own slaves in America. It was allowed to continue unabated for decades, and upheld by Supreme Court of the United States. The Confederacy seceded over the rights of states, which were being encroached upon by the Federal government, in violation of the Constitution.

But what does any of this have to do with the Russia-Georgian conflict. I posted the history of it all, did you read it? Probably not, since you seem to disagree with all major industrialized nations of the world.
 
Watermark said:
Succession is illegal, but so is rebellion. Once the rebels are in charge how "illegal" it is or not is no longer an issue.
Click to expand...

No, "rebellion" is illegal if the law is violated. Peaceful civil disobedience is encouraged. Succession is a right granted by God, not law. Read the founding document, it's there in black and white. Man can't make that right illegal.
 
Dixie said:
But what does any of this have to do with the Russia-Georgian conflict.
Click to expand...

Why you asking a stupid question to which you know the answer? South Ossetia seceded from Georgia. If they have that right then Georgia has no right to invade in order to bring them back under their control.
 
Dixie said:
LOL... Now you want to talk about the War Between the States? The issue was not about 'owning black people' because that had been established by the US government as law at the time, it wasn't illegal and hadn't been illegal to own slaves in America. It was allowed to continue unabated for decades, and upheld by Supreme Court of the United States. The Confederacy seceded over the rights of states, which were being encroached upon by the Federal government, in violation of the Constitution.

But what does any of this have to do with the Russia-Georgian conflict. I posted the history of it all, did you read it? Probably not, since you seem to disagree with all major industrialized nations of the world.
Click to expand...

Speaking of founding documents, you should read the founding (secession) documents of the Southern states again. Most of them say slavery was the cause. Only SC didn't specifically address slavery. Also, the Constitution did not protect slavery but did refer to them as "persons."
 
RStringfield said:
Why you asking a stupid question to which you know the answer? South Ossetia seceded from Georgia. If they have that right then Georgia has no right to invade in order to bring them back under their control.
Click to expand...

Well, that would be the case if the simpleton notion of all secession being equal, were the case, and it is not. That' why I used the analogy about chicken salad and chicken shit. Both involve chicken, but they are not equal or comparable. South Ossetia is not the CSA, Georgia is not the USA, and Russia is still just Russia. I fail to see any similarity at all, other than the word 'secession' is used in both cases.
 
Threedee said:
Speaking of founding documents, you should read the founding (secession) documents of the Southern states again. Most of them say slavery was the cause. Only SC didn't specifically address slavery. Also, the Constitution did not protect slavery but did refer to them as "persons."
Click to expand...

Start another thread if you need to be schooled on that some more, I am schooling Pinheads on the Russia-Georgia Conflict here.
 
Dixie said:
Well, that would be the case if the simpleton notion of all secession being equal, were the case, and it is not. That' why I used the analogy about chicken salad and chicken shit. Both involve chicken, but they are not equal or comparable. South Ossetia is not the CSA, Georgia is not the USA, and Russia is still just Russia. I fail to see any similarity at all, other than the word 'secession' is used in both cases.
Click to expand...

Fuck, you are dense. I understood your chickenshit response. Instead of making an argument on how they were different you just asserted that they were. How were they different?
 
Chicken salad is chicken, lettuce and other vegetables. Chickenshit is what is between your ears.

More chickenshit evasion. Answer the question, coward.
 
RStringfield said:
Chicken salad is chicken, lettuce and other vegetables. Chickenshit is what is between your ears.

More chickenshit evasion. Answer the question, coward.
Click to expand...

I posted the history of the conflict, I also posted the current position of the most industrialized nations of the world, regarding the conflict. I see nothing remotely similar in the secession of S. Osseita and the secession of the Confederate States of America, other than the word 'secession'. I could run down a list of stark differences in the two, but it seems just as easy to give the chicken shit and chicken salad analogy... same difference.
 
Yeah, right. This is a debate site where people make arguments and counter arguments. If you could provide a valid argument for your assertion it makes no sense why you would avoid doing so. Your analogy is nothing but a chickenshit response where you simply reassert that they are different while still failing to answer how.
 
RStringfield said:
Yeah, right. This is a debate site where people make arguments and counter arguments. If you could provide a valid argument for your assertion it makes no sense why you would avoid doing so. Your analogy is nothing but a chickenshit response where you simply reassert that they are different while still failing to answer how.
Click to expand...

I already made a valid argument. Every major industrialized nation denounced the Russian attacks on Georgia. We are allies with Georgia, and they are a potential future NATO member. Russia is being run by the KGB, and took aggressive action against our ally, Georgia. I posted the complete history of the conflict, straight from the NPR website... you can't attack the source, you can't attack the facts and truth. So, the next best thing is to draw some irrelevant correlation to the secession of the CSA from the Union 150 years ago, and attack Dixie!

You want to argue and debate? Why don't one of you idiots try articulating for us, why the G-7 are all wrong, and Russia was right? Please... explain it!
 
Dixie said:
I already made a valid argument. Every major industrialized nation denounced the Russian attacks on Georgia. We are allies with Georgia, and they are a potential future NATO member. Russia is being run by the KGB, and took aggressive action against our ally, Georgia. I posted the complete history of the conflict, straight from the NPR website... you can't attack the source, you can't attack the facts and truth. So, the next best thing is to draw some irrelevant correlation to the secession of the CSA from the Union 150 years ago, and attack Dixie!

You want to argue and debate? Why don't one of you idiots try articulating for us, why the G-7 are all wrong, and Russia was right? Please... explain it!
Click to expand...

That argument has nothing to do with my question or your assertion that the secession of South Ossetia is significantly different than the CSA or for that matter the colonies. If you are comfortable being a chickenshit who can offer no argument that is fine with me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top