Subject:
|
Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Sep 2001 13:19:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
885 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Horst Lehner writes:
> > Hello Ross,
>
> Hi Horst,
>
> > > Maybe the attack was violent, maybe it wasn't.
> >
> > Please, explain what a nonviolent attack is.
>
> Please replace "attack" with "action".
Evidence doesn't support the "action" being pacifistic.
But let's step back here. We've been wrangling and you're too stubborn to
admit you're wrong about the nuances (you accused me of wriggling, all I did
was try to restate things, I stand behind ANY variant of my original
assertion I gave....). And maybe so am I too stubborn, too stubborn to let
you get away with it.
We're not getting anywhere.
Can you take this back up to the larger context? What point are you trying
to make? My larger point is that pacifism isn't *always* the answer and I
gave an example. Do you disagree that pacifism isn't always the answer? Or
is it a different point altogether?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
| (...) Actually, it was "squirming" (URL) I explained what I actually meant in the footnote, which seems to be close to what you say below 8?) (...) I too stated (same post) that I agree with all three variants you've presented, just not the original (...) (23 years ago, 25-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
55 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
