**** Elections thread *****

[wufwugy]

Link?

Look for it yourself. There is a tremendous amount of Muslim on Muslim terrorism. And tons that has hit Europe.

The reason I don't provide substantiation myself as a rule anymore is because that sets it up to be disagreed with. If somebody seeks it out themselves, they are far more likely to weigh it.

Sounds incredible that all the countries that HAVE attacked american citizens in the past are no threat whatsoever, making it a sound choice not to ban them.

I wish they were banned. There are reasons they are not. A hope is that we will eventually have enough domestic oil production to tell Saudi Arabia to fuck off. But now, we can't.

I'm unimpressed by your quantity and quality of data and logic presented.

Eh, I could give the world and the typical response would still be



I do the same shit to others. It's nasty.

[Poopadoop]

The reason I don't provide substantiation myself as a rule anymore is because that sets it up to be disagreed with.

Well if your source is something credible, that would support your arguments. If your source is something you read on r/thedonald, then yeah you're probably right.

Unless you provide evidence to back up your claims when asked, they're nothing but empty arguments.

If somebody seeks it out themselves, they are far more likely to weigh it.

That's not how arguments work.

Descartes: Cogito ergo sum.

Pepe Lepeux : Why do you say that?

Descartes: Look it up.

...doesn't happen.

[wufwugy]

Well if your source is something credible, that would support your arguments. If your source is something you read on r/thedonald, then yeah you're probably right.

Unless you provide evidence to back up your claims when asked, they're nothing but empty arguments.




That's not how arguments work.

Descartes: Cogito ergo sum.

Pepe Lepeux : Why do you say that?

Descartes: Look it up.

...doesn't happen.

Assuming the human element is neutral. When in debate, it is not neutral.

[Poopadoop]

Assuming the human element is neutral. When in debate, it is not neutral.

Doesn't change the fact that if you present arguments with no evidence, they're shitarguments.

[wufwugy]

Doesn't change the fact that if you present arguments with no evidence, they're shitarguments.

For your benefit.

Also, don't think too highly of the goings on here. I think that your argument depends on you already agreeing with what you want me to substantiate in the first place, as I presented above.

[wufwugy]

Person A: Syria is so dangerous! Islamic terrorists keep killing Muslim Syrians! They're refugees!

Person B: We think the Islamic terrorists that are killing other Muslim Syrians are infiltrating the refugee groups.

Person A: What evidence do you have that there are terrorists in Syria!?!?!

[Poopadoop]

Person A: Syria is so dangerous! Islamic terrorists keep killing Muslim Syrians! They're refugees!

Person B: We think the Islamic terrorists that are killing other Muslim Syrians are infiltrating the refugee groups.

Person A: What evidence do you have that there are terrorists in Syria!?!?!

Are you saying cocobill is A and you are B?

[Poopadoop]

Or am I supposed to be A?

My point was this: if the argument is that the ban is to stop terrorism, and no terrorists have ever come from the banned countries, whereas countries whose nationals have committed terrorists acts in the US aren't on the list, it's a hard sell.

[wufwugy]

Or am I supposed to be A?

My point was this: if the argument is that the ban is to stop terrorism, and no terrorists have ever come from the banned countries, whereas countries whose nationals have committed terrorists acts in the US aren't on the list, it's a hard sell.

Nuclear war is not a threat because it has never happened. Global warming is not a threat to civilization because has not been a threat to civilization.

Or...

[Poopadoop]

Nuclear war is not a threat because it has never happened. Global warming is not a threat to civilization because has not been a threat to civilization.

Or...

By that logic, you should also ban immigrants from Canada, the UK, and all other countries. Just because a terrorist has never come from those places to the US, it's not a threat to happen.

Or...

[CoccoBill]

Look for it yourself. There is a tremendous amount of Muslim on Muslim terrorism. And tons that has hit Europe.

The reason I don't provide substantiation myself as a rule anymore is because that sets it up to be disagreed with. If somebody seeks it out themselves, they are far more likely to weigh it.

What do you mean anymore?

I wish they were banned. There are reasons they are not. A hope is that we will eventually have enough domestic oil production to tell Saudi Arabia to fuck off. But now, we can't.

Ok, so nothing to do with islamic terrorism. Glad we agree.

Eh, I could give the world and the typical response would still be



I do the same shit to others. It's nasty.

I dunno, maybe you're right. Wouldn't hurt to try tho.