Military given go-ahead to detain US terrorist suspects without trial

[knapplc]

yes he is. He interjects information that no one else is talking about which then paints him in the light that he is always right. For example no one was even talking about the special forces that did the acutal work of killing Osama but he brought it up to use for later. I have no problem being wrong or even admitting to it like i have done earlier. Sometimes he does not stay within the scope of the thread. I have to constantly point out what i said so that he even gets it. He assumes what i said and puts words in my mouth. Ask yourself something why haven't i lashed out at you then? if you say i am acting like a child? If he wants to start another discussion within the thread that's fine but he came in here quoting other people and then went off topic and kept quoting you when you answered me back filling in for you.

 

Where, in any of this wall of text, do you get the idea that you have the ability to launch personal attacks at another member?

[husker_99]

WHOA!!! There is no need for personal attacks. If you can't continue the conversation without calling someone a name, either take it to the Woodshed or walk away.

 

Then you might want to tell carlfense to stop his trolling. Unless you support trolling on this board?

He isn't trolling, he's asking you some very simple questions. You are getting agitated, and you lashed out. Either continue the conversation or walk away. Acting like a child because you cannot get yourself out of the mess you've created doesn't give you an excuse to call people names.

 

No more warnings.

 

yes he is. He interjects information that no one else is talking about which then paints him in the light that he is always right. For example no one was even talking about the special forces that did the acutal work of killing Osama but he brought it up to use for later. I have no problem being wrong or even admitting to it like i have done earlier. Sometimes he does not stay within the scope of the thread. I have to constantly point out what i said so that he even gets it. He assumes what i said and puts words in my mouth. Ask yourself something why haven't i lashed out at you then? if you say i am acting like a child? If he wants to start another discussion within the thread that's fine but he came in here quoting other people and then went off topic and kept quoting you when you answered me back filling in for you.

No I'm not.

 

You tried to say that knapplc and/or I were arguing that Obama deserves sole credit. That is not true. I never said that. knapp never said that. You invented that.

 

Later, you tried to say that if I didn't think that Obama deserves sole credit it must mean that Bush deserves the credit. That is not true. There are approximately 7 billion other people in the world that could share the credit. Again, you are not correct. You invented that.

 

Your argument is weak and you're doing little to improve your reasoning. What's particularly interesting, I think, is that you're trying to simultaneously argue that getting Bin Laden is not a big deal . . . and that Bush deserves the credit. Heads Bush wins, tails Obama loses, right?

 

Once again Carlfense i will say it again. I said Obama doesn't deserve sole credit for killing Osama and Bush deserves some. I never once talked about the actual team that killed them. only Presidents. I never said Obama loses and Bush wins. What you have said is that Bush deserves no credit and I am simply saying he does. I said if Bush deserves no credit then Obama must receive sole credit then. which you still haven't answered. You are only seeing what you want to see from my posts. Yes i said Bin Laden wasn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.

[husker_99]

yes he is. He interjects information that no one else is talking about which then paints him in the light that he is always right. For example no one was even talking about the special forces that did the acutal work of killing Osama but he brought it up to use for later. I have no problem being wrong or even admitting to it like i have done earlier. Sometimes he does not stay within the scope of the thread. I have to constantly point out what i said so that he even gets it. He assumes what i said and puts words in my mouth. Ask yourself something why haven't i lashed out at you then? if you say i am acting like a child? If he wants to start another discussion within the thread that's fine but he came in here quoting other people and then went off topic and kept quoting you when you answered me back filling in for you.

 

Where, in any of this wall of text, do you get the idea that you have the ability to launch personal attacks at another member?

 

never said i did.

[carlfense]

Once again Carlfense i will say it again. I said Obama doesn't deserve sole credit for killing Osama and Bush deserves some. I never once talked about the actual team that killed them. only Presidents. I never said Obama loses and Bush wins. What you have said is that Bush deserves no credit and I am simply saying he does. I said if Bush deserves no credit then Obama must receive sole credit then. which you still haven't answered. You are only seeing what you want to see from my posts. Yes i said Bin Laden wasn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.

If we are only talking about presidential credit here (which you did not say until now . . . you had just said "sole credit") then I agree that Obama deserves sole presidential credit.

 

Bush tried. Failed. Quit.

 

Obama tried and succeeded.

 

That's about it.

[husker_99]

Once again Carlfense i will say it again. I said Obama doesn't deserve sole credit for killing Osama and Bush deserves some. I never once talked about the actual team that killed them. only Presidents. I never said Obama loses and Bush wins. What you have said is that Bush deserves no credit and I am simply saying he does. I said if Bush deserves no credit then Obama must receive sole credit then. which you still haven't answered. You are only seeing what you want to see from my posts. Yes i said Bin Laden wasn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.

If we are only talking about presidential credit here (which you did not say until now . . . you had just said "sole credit") then I agree that Obama deserves sole presidential credit.

 

Bush tried. Failed. Quit.

 

Obama tried and succeeded.

 

That's about it.

 

At what point in this thread was i ever talking about anyone other than the President receiving credit?

[carlfense]

At what point in this thread was i ever talking about anyone other than the President receiving credit?

At what point prior to #182 did you say only presidents? I can show you where you said "sole credit" about Obama. No one but you said that. Are you arguing with yourself?

 

I'll also wait for you to show where I said that ONLY Obama deserves credit.

 

Take your time. I'll wait.

 

 

 

Have you decided whether killing Bin Laden matters? Does it still depend on whether we can credit Bush?

[husker_99]

At what point in this thread was i ever talking about anyone other than the President receiving credit?

At what point prior to #182 did you say only presidents? I can show you where you said "sole credit" about Obama. No one but you said that. Are you arguing with yourself?

 

I'll also wait for you to show where I said that ONLY Obama deserves credit.

 

Take your time. I'll wait.

 

 

 

Have you decided whether killing Bin Laden matters? Does it still depend on whether we can credit Bush?

 

I didn't but if the topic is only covering Presidents then it safe to bet that it is what it is limited to. I would never take credit away from the task force personally repsonible. I never said only Obama takes credit. I said Bush should get some for starting the manhunt on Osama. Even if you have been saying Bush gave up(which i don't think he did just kept tabs on) without his intelligence Obama would have never killed him. Personally i don't care if Bin Laden is dead or not. didn't affect me one bit

[carlfense]

I didn't but if the topic is only covering Presidents then it safe to bet that it is what it is limited to.

Where are you seeing that the topic only covers presidents?

[husker_99]

I didn't but if the topic is only covering Presidents then it safe to bet that it is what it is limited to.

Where are you seeing that the topic only covers presidents?

 

Again didn't say that. Just implied from the conversation since only Bush and Obama being discussed on the killing of Osama.

[carlfense]

Again didn't say that. Just implied from the conversation since only Bush and Obama being discussed on the killing of Osama.

False.

 

http://www.huskerboa...post__p__931404

[husker_99]

Again didn't say that. Just implied from the conversation since only Bush and Obama being discussed on the killing of Osama.

False.

 

http://www.huskerboa...post__p__931404

 

but only you were discussing it.

[carlfense]

Again didn't say that. Just implied from the conversation since only Bush and Obama being discussed on the killing of Osama.

False.

 

http://www.huskerboa...post__p__931404

 

but only you were discussing it.

Ah. But you said that only Bush and Obama were discussed. Now you admit that I was discussing others?

 

Are you arguing with yourself again?

[husker_99]

Apart from the discussion I want to say this:

 

I am sorry for personally attacking carlfense. I shouldn't have done it and I was wrong. No excuses. I don't know if you saw it or not carl but i'm sorry.

[carlfense]

Apart from the discussion I want to say this:

 

I am sorry for personally attacking carlfense. I shouldn't have done it and I was wrong. No excuses. I don't know if you saw it or not carl but i'm sorry.

I didn't see it but I accept your apology. Things get heated in the P&R forum. No harm done.

[knapplc]

I'm just glad we got that resolved.

 

Everybody ready to move on from this conversation, which really doesn't have much of a point anyway?

 

[privatemessage=husker_99] If it's any consolation, I agree that Carlfense is a *(#$R(%(#($. I've just never said it publicly. That guy is totally a menace. [/privatemessage]