You most certainly DID say that the genocide vote led to the turkish authoriztion to use force:
What are the Dems up to threatening Turkey?
- Thread starter Chapdog
- Start date
You most certainly DID say that the genocide vote led to the turkish authoriztion to use force:
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Relative to other countries in the mid east... it is NOT new. It was created at the same damn time.
We do NOT have the ability to force countries like Turkey, Iran and Iraq to re-draw their borders in order to create a new country. Please provide some evidence to the contrary if you disagree.
Litmus
Verified User
We simply DO have the ability.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yes retard, I said that the the decision was cause and effect. But I did not say....
"Originally Posted by Cypress
Good. Then it appears you agree that the house panel vote played virutally no role in causing turkey to consider attacking Iraq. "
Do you see the difference in the two retard? There is a difference between saying there was a known cause and effect of the Turkish vote and saying that the house committee vote played virtually no role in causing Turkey to consider attacking Iraq. But you are quite clearly to fucking moronic to understand that.
Please, do the world a favor and go play in heavy traffic. Idiot
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Really? You think we have the power to go in and take land away from Turkey, Iraq and Iran to create Kurdistan? Please. That is ridiculous.
I don't see any difference between saying a vote to authorize military action and considering military action
Are you really going to throw a hissy fit, because to the difference in the words "authorizing" and "considering"?
Litmus
Verified User
No it's not. We just have to actually use our bombs instead of sending people to die because they're cheaper than expensive bombs. It is possible.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
That wasn't the difference you fucking moron.
1) You stated that "Originally Posted by Cypress
Good. Then it appears you agree that the house panel vote played virutally no role in causing turkey to consider attacking Iraq.
2) I said, that is NOT my position
3) Then you stated "You most certainly DID say that the genocide vote led to the turkish authoriztion to use force:"
The difference in those two statements is that the statement in #3 is correct in that I said the genocide vote LED to the turkish vote. The statement in number three says that the genocide vote played NO ROLE in the turkish vote.
ONE says there is a casual relationship. The other says there was NO casual relationship.
You fucking moron.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
If you believe that you are delusional. If we were to bomb Turkey/Iran/Iraq to create Kurdistan, the Muslim world would come down on us in force. They would not allow us to dictate to them what the borders should be. Not to mention China and Russia also coming into the mix against us. We cannot re-draw borders without the cooperation of the countries effected by such a change.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"View Post Today, 11:08 AM
Remove user from ignore listCypress
This message is hidden because Cypress is on your ignore list. "
Sorry... no more of your idiotic rantings. Go play your strawmen games with someone else.
Remove user from ignore listCypress
This message is hidden because Cypress is on your ignore list. "
Sorry... no more of your idiotic rantings. Go play your strawmen games with someone else.
LOL
I think you owe my an apology, for calling me a "fucking liar", a "moron", and an "idiot", when I just showed you with your OWN words, that you most certainly conclusively drew a causual relationship between the house panel vote, and turkey's authorization of military force.
I think you owe my an apology, for calling me a "fucking liar", a "moron", and an "idiot", when I just showed you with your OWN words, that you most certainly conclusively drew a causual relationship between the house panel vote, and turkey's authorization of military force.
Litmus
Verified User
SHut up liar. You're so full of it your eyes are brown. We just don't deem the kurds WORTH IT.
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
It's never going to sink in SF, just agree to disagree with them. They are playing 'gotchas' with you now and putting meaning to statements that are stronger than what was intended.
Cypress, it is clear that Pelosi was talking about our relations with Turkey and that they will remain strong, and SF pointed out how they aren't strong because they authorized force. If they were strong, they wouldn't have done that because that is the only thing holding them back.
Cypress, it is clear that Pelosi was talking about our relations with Turkey and that they will remain strong, and SF pointed out how they aren't strong because they authorized force. If they were strong, they wouldn't have done that because that is the only thing holding them back.
Nice spin.
The reason allegedly Turkey authorized military force, is because of the house vote. That's what this entire thread was about. You can't tip toe away from that assertion now, and you can't pretend that turkey's vote happened in a vaccum.
SF drew a correlation between the genocide bill in the house, and turkey's authorization of force.
When I said that he did suggest that, I was called a "fucking liar". His own words are crystal clear, about the correlation.
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
I think you are the one spinning shit cypress, and if I'm spinning, them I'm just putting it right back to what was meant by his original statement. Now you are saying that this thread was saying that because of the house vote, Turkey is authorizing force. I guess you just aren't following the argument. You can try and put words and meanings to what we say but we've been clear as day. We've been talking about how the house bill dimished relations enough that Turkey is now authorizing force despite our desire to keep them out. You obviously like to spin things cypress, then blame others for the spin game you play.
Its laughable to suggest that no one on this entire thread correlated turkey's vote for the authorization of force, to the Genocide bill in the house.
I haven't read every post on this thread, but if some people later backtracked from that assertion, and now admit that turkey's authorization for force was NOT related to the Genocide bill, then I'm cool with that. Because, that was MY assertion 50 posts ago, and I guess you all agree now that I was right.
I haven't read every post on this thread, but if some people later backtracked from that assertion, and now admit that turkey's authorization for force was NOT related to the Genocide bill, then I'm cool with that. Because, that was MY assertion 50 posts ago, and I guess you all agree now that I was right.
The only one spinning in this thread is the one who pretends that direct warnings followed by an action have no correlation.
The question is why are they doing this right now? They have held back barely up to now, the question isn't what made them mad, it is are they serious? They have made it clear that they are.
So, now we're back to saying that the house genocide bill DID directly played a role in turkey's decision to hold a vote on authorizing force? After I was lectured that "no one" ever said that, and was called a "fucking liar" for suggesting it?
