Why This Forum Frustrates Me So

[Timber Loftis]

I'll add more reasons as I think of them but here's some thoughts on why the Circular Discussions War Forum frustrates me so.

1. Circular Discussions: I'm sick of reading the same opinions from the same people, while seeing almost nobody show any signs of *learning* anything. Not that I don't have anything to learn myself. I have garnered a lot of information that I didn't have before by reading all your posts, and that is likely true for all of you as well. But, I don't think anyone's basic opinion (support or don't support) of the war has changed. Anyone who has seen a view shift on their part, please feel free to tell me - it would be welcome news.

(I will say that I did learn about cluster bombs and have changed my mind about their use based on the landmine-type effect remaining for years.)

2. Unlike most of you on both sides of the debate, I have no intellectual objection to dead people. Now, my emotions may be tweaked, and I may feel a slight sting in my eye, but I quickly put it out of the way because my reason dictates that the individual person means nothing in the big picture. Since I'm an aetheist, it means everything to me if, say, my friend or cousin experiences a tragedy - in those instances emotion overcomes reason and selfishness prevails. But, other than that my reason dictates I simply not care about individual human tragedies. For me, the central unit of "spirit" is embodied in the species-being. I would prefer 10 million people fall dead right now rather than one rare flower species be driven to extinction. Plus, as you can tell by the way I harp about population problems on other portions of IWF, I feel there are too many people to begin with.

3. Good for goose but not for gander. I don't like the fact that the picture of the big dumb ungraceful cowboy can be used to refer to Americans over and over again, but you call the French aloof cowards just once and get flamed to a crisp toastiness. I use the French as an example because that was the biggest blowup, but it applies evenly all around. This also ties into how folks view America with a double standard. On IWF, as in its international relations, America is held to a standard others aren't. I've called this "damned if you do damned if you don't" time and time again.

Okay, just a general [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img] Be well, all. If I've offended in this thread, feel free to flame away. But, I am simply sharing some honest thoughts, though I know not what compelled me to voice them.

[Animal]

There really is only one thing that frustrates me about this forum.

1. Respect

As you pointed out Timber, the Americans often get painted with the John Wayne brush six shooter at the ready, but I do beg to differ that other countries are perpetrated in the same manner.

Iraq is often (not by all) painted as an evil empire, with every Iraqi who is willing to fight called some form of obnoxious name, put down and insulted. This shows a fundemental lack of respect for a situation that we know nothing about. They may have been told that US troops are invading their country to rape their women and murder their children, we just don't know.

I recognize that debates can get heated, I've been in a few and instigated a few myself, but we still need to be respectful.

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I'll add more reasons as I think of them but here's some thoughts on why the Circular Discussions War Forum frustrates me so. 1. Circular Discussions: I'm sick of reading the same opinions from the same people, while seeing almost nobody show any signs of *learning* anything. Not that I don't have anything to learn myself. I have garnered a lot of information that I didn't have before by reading all your posts, and that is likely true for all of you as well. But, I don't think anyone's basic opinion (support or don't support) of the war has changed. Anyone who has seen a view shift on their part, please feel free to tell me - it would be welcome news. (I will say that I did learn about cluster bombs and have changed my mind about their use based on the landmine-type effect remaining for years.)

I was vehemently against this war being started, esp since the U.S. gets all the credit or blame, depending on how you look at it, for starting it.

Having learned more details about what Saddam Hussein has put the Iraqi people through since he has been in power, having seen the vast differences in the living conditions of Iraq's "elite" and those they leave to starve to death and die of illness, the more I see the need for "regime change" and find myself appalled that he was left in power this long when everyone supposedly knew what was going on, the more I support the war.

Even though it was WoMD that started this war, it appears as if it will be freedom from oppression that will end it (keeping fingers crossed on that one), and for that reason, I lend support to the coalition forces there...in the hopes that they can be done with their tasks and return home soon. My support lies more with the troops than the war. It stems from a caring for people who would put themselves in harm's way to protect others, either by choice or by command.

If I said I had learned nothing about cluster bombs, I'd be lying.
I've learned a lot of things since stepping into this forum, not all of them things I would have sought to learn but there is never any harmed in being informed (unless you take Baghdad Bob's word on how the Iraqi's are destroying the coalition )

2. Unlike most of you on both sides of the debate, I have no intellectual objection to dead people. Now, my emotions may be tweaked, and I may feel a slight sting in my eye, but I quickly put it out of the way because my reason dictates that the individual person means nothing in the big picture. Since I'm an aetheist, it means everything to me if, say, my friend or cousin experiences a tragedy - in those instances emotion overcomes reason and selfishness prevails. But, other than that my reason dictates I simply not care about individual human tragedies. For me, the central unit of "spirit" is embodied in the species-being. I would prefer 10 million people fall dead right now rather than one rare flower species be driven to extinction. Plus, as you can tell by the way I harp about population problems on other portions of IWF, I feel there are too many people to begin with.

As much as I feel there are too many people in the world, I don't approve of war being the method to take them out of it. I feel for the people who have lost loved ones...I may not shed same extremely emotional tears that I have for family members but I do feel for them.

3. Good for goose but not for gander. I don't like the fact that the picture of the big dumb ungraceful cowboy can be used to refer to Americans over and over again, but you call the French aloof cowards just once and get flamed to a crisp toastiness. I use the French as an example because that was the biggest blowup, but it applies evenly all around. This also ties into how folks view America with a double standard. On IWF, as in its international relations, America is held to a standard others aren't. I've called this "damned if you do damned if you don't" time and time again.

Having earned a reputation as a tougher crowd, we are not supposed to be bothered by it but I know where you're are coming from...for completely anti-American remarks/questions to come out of conversation that didn't call for them is even more surprising but consider the source. Let the mods know where people have gone overboard when you feel they have, but first, step back and try to see it from an unbiased point of view; then ask yourself if words can hurt you...they only serve to make those who make the remarks feel better about themselves.

Okay, just a general [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img] Be well, all. If I've offended in this thread, feel free to flame away. But, I am simply sharing some honest thoughts, though I know not what compelled me to voice them.

No offense here, even where we would disagree, and there is nothing wrong with getting your honest feelings out in the open. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Peace

[Mordenheim]

Circular Discussions

I am only going to touch this part because I don't want to get into a flame war. Almost all serious debates end up that way. From religion to left/right and so on. There is only so much you can say. Only so many ways you can say it.

The exchange will always go back to the purpose. The topic may change but the purpose (the war in general) does not.

Last I see a lot of insulting with grace. It is ok to insult with grace but not ok to not beat around the "bush". I have had word's placed in my mouth and discussions changed into what people WANT to see in them. I could show more then a few examples. It is not ok to bash Chirac but it is ok to bash Bush severly from calling him a coke head to Adolf Hitler. It is not ok for me to call the french people naive but it is ok to be told the American people are "blinded" by the press. It is ok to bash British and American press but if I call a arab report propaganda I am insulting all arab people.

A watched a long time member here get insulted in a very personal way. He chose to share how casualties did not offend him because it happen's everywhere. This was his opinion and his right to say this. Yet I watched another member insult him by bringing his "church and personal values into question.

I will give respect to those I feel give me respect. To those who do not put word's into my mouth and twist what I say. I have a right to defend a stance. I have a right to call a spade a spade. If someone can call me blinded then I have every right to respond in kind. I see a lot of double standard going on.

Originally posted by Mordenheim: I have had word's placed in my mouth and discussions changed into what people WANT to see in them. I could show more then a few examples.

Unfortunately this kind of behaviour exists and quelling it is futile...as long as someone can twist what you say into what they want it to say without openly insulting you, it is going to be "overlooked"...the mods here do expect us all to act like adults and when this happens we are expected not to respond in kind or in anger...the best thing to do is not to respond at all (but then they think that by getting the last word in, they win, I know )...its a hard task to take on, monitoring what everyone means, as hard as it is to figure out what people are even saying sometimes, even when its seemingly obvious.
What can you do but take a break and let go of the frustrations they hand you and come back later in hopes that a more responsible and adult attitude has developed?

Check your PM.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: 3. Good for goose but not for gander. I don't like the fact that the picture of the big dumb ungraceful cowboy can be used to refer to Americans over and over again, but you call the French aloof cowards just once and get flamed to a crisp toastiness. I use the French as an example because that was the biggest blowup, but it applies evenly all around. This also ties into how folks view America with a double standard. On IWF, as in its international relations, America is held to a standard others aren't. I've called this "damned if you do damned if you don't" time and time again.

This is the one that "gets my goat", "Hale" after making a post about it's ok to call President Bush/USA cowboys as long as you apply the same standard to calling the French or anybody else names is also ok. I got jumped on about something that wasn't even on the subject, a "quatium leap" of logic to reach that conclusion that was used as ammunition in the debate.

I'll add:
4) Not answering the questions asked but rather answering questions that people think is asked (NOT THE SAME THING). Not paying attention to the words used in the questions. Words have meanings and those meanings are there for a reason.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Mordenheim: A watched a long time member here get insulted in a very personal way. He chose to share how casualties did not offend him because it happen's everywhere. This was his opinion and his right to say this. Yet I watched another member insult him by bringing his "church and personal values into question. I will give respect to those I feel give me respect. To those who do not put word's into my mouth and twist what I say. I have a right to defend a stance. I have a right to call a spade a spade. If someone can call me blinded then I have every right to respond in kind. I see a lot of double standard going on.

I personally would welcome an open insult even if it had to be carried to PM's, "HALE" I'm 41 years old I've been called a lot worse by a lot ******.

[ 04-09-2003, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[Mordenheim]

I feel the same way John

Originally posted by John D Harris: Quote: Originally posted by Mordenheim: A watched a long time member here get insulted in a very personal way. He chose to share how casualties did not offend him because it happen's everywhere. This was his opinion and his right to say this. Yet I watched another member insult him by bringing his "church and personal values into question. I will give respect to those I feel give me respect. To those who do not put word's into my mouth and twist what I say. I have a right to defend a stance. I have a right to call a spade a spade. If someone can call me blinded then I have every right to respond in kind. I see a lot of double standard going on.

I personally would welcome an open insult even if it had to be carried to PM's, "HALE" I'm 41 years old I've been called a lot worse by a lot better. [/QUOTE]You are well aware you could have been a lot more respectful by leaving out the words "by a lot better". No one is demanding that they be liked, but respect should be given in a forum of this nature as we are all not bound to agree on everything. You can be honest without insulting others.
I don't get it.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Lil Lil: Quote: Originally posted by John D Harris: Quote: Originally posted by Mordenheim: A watched a long time member here get insulted in a very personal way. He chose to share how casualties did not offend him because it happen's everywhere. This was his opinion and his right to say this. Yet I watched another member insult him by bringing his "church and personal values into question. I will give respect to those I feel give me respect. To those who do not put word's into my mouth and twist what I say. I have a right to defend a stance. I have a right to call a spade a spade. If someone can call me blinded then I have every right to respond in kind. I see a lot of double standard going on.

I personally would welcome an open insult even if it had to be carried to PM's, "HALE" I'm 41 years old I've been called a lot worse by a lot better. [/QUOTE]You are well aware you could have been a lot more respectful by leaving out the words "by a lot better". No one is demanding that they be liked, but respect should be given in a forum of this nature as we are all not bound to agree on everything. You can be honest without insulting others.
I don't get it.[/QUOTE]Sorry Miss Lil Lil Ma'am,
No offence was intended but it was to illustrate the point that alot of what is precieved as an insult, or name calling really isn't. Besides talk is cheap, sticks and stones and all that stuff, people take offence over the littlest things, no idividual was singled out. It was a general statement, by diffinition, that fits some and doen't fit others.
Now you haven't been calling me names while my monitor has been turn off have you?
I'll edit the post, if you were offended, [img]smile.gif[/img]