Heretic;1786511 wrote:Quaker is at Isadore levels when it comes to just being piss-poor at actually arguing/discussing points. First, dude makes a sweeping blanket generalization, which to have any validity whatsoever, would lead people to think ALL 1940s guys were fighting for their lives, while ALL 2010s guys are pussies hiding in "safe zones". When someone brings up how guys now also enter the armed forces, he backtracks with a "well, I'm not talking about THOSE GUYS", which means it's not a sweeping blanket generalization, which means his initial sweeping blanket generalization now has no merit. And, instead of recognizing that, he just tries (and fails) at being "tricky" with "see, you're OFFENDED!" posts, even though it looks more like everyone is just mocking him for sucking at logic.
And here he comes riding in to set things straight as always.
So for him and other folks here with limited comprehension abilities:
thread is about pussification
obviously anyone in military service is not in that subset
I further compare and contrast those in military service in a previous generation with wimps on campus crying for safe zones. Common sense dictates that anyone who served or is serving is not a wimp on campus crying for safe zones.
Most with common sense completely understand the post.
Attack(s) rain down unfairly and disingenuously tying post to criticism of current service men and women.
I post about those serving: "God bless them".
Nearly everyone understands except those wishing to be offended somehow.
I care about their twisted logic about as much as I care about wimps wanting safe zones on campus.
Good luck.
