• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran threatens UAE over Israel deal

Status
Not open for further replies.
oneworld2 said:
Citations would be useful. Evidence etc

The way I see it his outright refusal to condemn gas attacks on people from the get go, period, and his decision to try to defend those from the US that assisted in some of them being successful leaves him open to the charge of being okay with them in certain circumstances IE against military personnel. That was my accusation and I stand by it.

His ruse of " where did I say that ? " has been already answered by me saying he didn't actually say it as such but that people seldom if ever come clean in such candid ways and it is left to others to deduce from their words what motivations belie them. I know you understand this because my probing of your own is what has probably accounted for your appearance here. Correct ? Or was it a simple PM ? :)
Click to expand...

I quoted your lie.

And I showed why it is a lie.

Please lie again about nothing being presented.
 
Fledermaus said:
44































RUN AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

I will cite it seeing as you have chosen not to

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.
Click to expand...

That's inline with what I stated.............. you choose to lessen gas attacks on those wearing uniform especially if they are probably free of US involvement in their prosecution, as per the two examples cited.

I am a tad more consistant and condemn gas attacks on all people , uniformed or not and regardless of who is involved in their prosecution. You ? > Not so much, if US personnel are involved you seek to defend theat involvement. Neither was there any response wrt the thousands of innocent Iranian civilians gassed by SH in that war

Put all of that together and my comments aren't that far off the mark
 
oneworld2 said:
I will cite it seeing as you have chosen not to

That's inline with what I stated.............. you choose to lessen gas attacks on those wearing uniform especially if they are probably free of US involvement in their prosecution, as per the two examples cited.

I am a tad more consistant and condemn gas attacks on all people , uniformed or not and regardless of who is involved in their prosecution. You ? > Not so much, if US personnel are involved you seek to defend theat involvement. Neither was there any response wrt the thousands of innocent Iranian civilians gassed by SH in that war

Put all of that together and my comments aren't that far off the mark
Click to expand...

Heinous is heinous, less heinous is also still heinous....

Heinous - (of a person or wrongful act, especially a crime) utterly odious or wicked.

English..... Try it

The lie : #A man who has no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform is in no position to lecture others on what " looks bad"

Lessen =/= has no problem with

The only thing you are constant on is lying and crawfishing.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Closed for mod review. All posts are still subject to moderation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom