Briton fighting in Syria 'killed himself' to avoid IS capture

[roo860]

 
I do not dispute that and even though this is way off topic now, I would just comment that I believe the economic contribution of the Malvinas Islands to the UK is negative. I recall an analysis from that time indicating that the entire population could be put up the Savoy for the rest of their lives at less cost to the UK taxpayer than the subsidies required to maintain their economy.
 
The feelings of a few thousand may not be enough to maintain the status quo. In any case, the control of the islands is in dispute. I have no view on the merits of the dispute but that dispute should be heard and arbitrated through provisions under international law. Otherwise UK participation in armed conflicts over other disputed territory is unethical.

I think it went off topic when you mentioned the' Malvinas ', I'm sure that was a deliberate attempt to stir the sh#t.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

2 hours ago, roo860 said:

 

 

I think it went off topic when you mentioned the' Malvinas ', I'm sure that was a deliberate attempt to stir the sh#t.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

 

 

 

In post 36, in response to being called a coward, I questioned how various people being killed secured my safety and constitutional rights. I specifically mentioned Argentinians and Iraqis. i do no believe that killing any of those people protected me or made me safer. As for the Malvinas thing, I also reference Uluru instead of the former colonial appellation of Ayres Rock. That's geo-politics for you. If some little englander doesn't like it, tough. This is the age of truth speaking irrespective of the feelings of right wing snowflakes.

 

 

[roo860]

 
In post 36, in response to being called a coward, I questioned how various people being killed secured my safety and constitutional rights. I specifically mentioned Argentinians and Iraqis. i do no believe that killing any of those people protected me or made me safer. As for the Malvinas thing, I also reference Uluru instead of the former colonial appellation of Ayres Rock. That's geo-politics for you. If some little englander doesn't like it, tough. This is the age of truth speaking irrespective of the feelings of right wing snowflakes.
 
[/url]  

Nah, it's called baiting.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[overherebc]

3 minutes ago, roo860 said:

 

Nah, it's called baiting.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

 

Nah.

It's standard spouting of wanna be politicians. Changing the theme, changing the list of statistics, and generally just waffling on and on until people have had enough.

The next politician or wanna be politician who answers a question with yes or no will be the first.

Wait till you see the shxt I get for this post.

[overherebc]

37 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

In post 36, in response to being called a coward, I questioned how various people being killed secured my safety and constitutional rights. I specifically mentioned Argentinians and Iraqis. i do no believe that killing any of those people protected me or made me safer. As for the Malvinas thing, I also reference Uluru instead of the former colonial appellation of Ayres Rock. That's geo-politics for you. If some little englander doesn't like it, tough. This is the age of truth speaking irrespective of the feelings of right wing snowflakes.

 

 

 

Might be few locals in the museum in France are feeling safer after the guy who was entering with a couple of machettes, was shot by a soldier on duty.

Or is that different?

Reply 'yes' they felt safer then.

Or 'no' and take three and half pages to explain why you said 'no'

Edited February 6, 2017 by overherebc

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

2 hours ago, overherebc said:

 

Might be few locals in the museum in France are feeling safer after the guy who was entering with a couple of machettes, was shot by a soldier on duty.

Or is that different?

Reply 'yes' they felt safer then.

Or 'no' and take three and half pages to explain why you said 'no'

 

You wish to discuss the merits of applying the US Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 to French legal architecture? Happy to do so on an appropriate thread. Otherwise your appropriation and beat up of a criminal action for rhetorical purposes is woefully hysterical.

 

If you cannot address the point, then just move on. Your attempt at using the Complex Question fallacy is somewhat amateurish.

[overherebc]

1 minute ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

You wish to discuss the merits of applying the US Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 to French legal architecture? Happy to do so on an appropriate thread. Otherwise your appropriation and beat up of a criminal action for rhetorical purposes is woefully hysterical.

 

If you cannot address the point, then just move on. Your attempt at using the Complex Question fallacy is somewhat amateurish.

I'll take your answer as being a 100% maybe.

Don't you ever get fed up being wound up?

[Scott]

Continued off-topic trolling WILL result in suspensions.  

 

You have been warned.