Skip to main content

View Diary: Hello! You've been targeted for a U.S. drone assassination! (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If one wants to misconstrue... (0+ / 0-)

    because it was rather clear.

    It was others that mentioned declarations of "war" and I simply said it was not used by states and others involved in armed conflict. Then something in the context of rules of war.

    Who does not know what the Constitution says? Meanings change. A declaration could be an authorization these days. Overall, it matters little when it actually comes to war as it is practiced in the world.

    So why suggest that I should be even more clear than I was?  

    •  "When I use a word," (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

      "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

      "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - - that's all."

      •  And your point is? (0+ / 0-)

        In truth, I cannot get what your metaphor is saying.

        If you want to think that only a declaration of war raises the rules of war, your choice.

        I suggest there is a substantive distinction. Conflating serves no purpose to me and I cannot understand what the issue is in this regard.

        •  I think words have meaning. And you... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:


          •  That is a pretty dumb thing to say. (0+ / 0-)

            Is that really the best level of discourse you can provide?


            •  I rise to the occasion. (0+ / 0-)
              Who does not know what the Constitution says? Meanings change. A declaration could be an authorization these days.

              Did you say that or not?

              •  Is that not so? (0+ / 0-)

                Are you saying there without a declaration, force is never permitted?

                What level of force constitutes armed conflict.

                If there is authorization granted to engage in armed conflict against a state or entity, is that not akin to a present day declaration?

                These seem to be relevant and real questions regarding use of force in the present day.

                I still do not get your point with regard to the substance of the issue, and believe it is dumb to play word games. You rise to the occasion, but does that matter? Why don't you offer some thoughts regarding the matters with respect to the issue itself?

            •  A "dumb" thing to "say" (0+ / 0-)

              You really aren't all that picky about the literal meaning of the words you employ are you?

              Alito. Kennedy. Roberts. Scalia. Thomas. More important than ever: ERA NOW!

              by greeseyparrot on Sun Mar 18, 2012 at 11:53:04 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, dumb is dumb. (0+ / 0-)

                I am and keep trying to talk about the issue of armed conflict and find it dumb to make it about the way I use words and what they mean to me as compared to others.

                I suppose this means there is really not much that can be offered on the matter in regard to the substantive issues I have been addressing.

                I'll leave it there. I do not understand what people often find important here to use energy on.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site