Discussion»Questions»Language» The purpose of using firey rhetoric is do what? Inflame/intimidate/bully/impress? Get attention? Flex a muscle? What does it do for YOU?
I don't know what does it for me but I do know that in the case of Trump it is seen as, and possibly intended as, bullying and intimidation. The problem with that is it can backfire and it can goad people... My worry isn't for America.. they are strong enough to cope.. but a lot, and I do mean a lot of innocent people could be hurt or lose their lives because of Trump's big mouth and his inability to think before he opens his big mouth
Thank you for your thoughtful answer Addb. You think America is strong enough to cope? All the power resides with the bad guys. Without power there is no coping or hoping. :(
Sometimes it works. After diplomacy, appeasement, negotiations, summits, sanctions, boycotts and all else fails, what's left?? Harsh language got missiles out of Cuba in 1962. It didn't work when Truman warned the Japanese of what was coming in the form of nuclear weapons in 1945.
Mostly true... about harsh words etc.. I know when I have exhausted ALL possible forms of diplomacy, negotiation and appeals to someone's better nature then I start using very plain language and people run :P However,.. in this case.. did we actually see, hear, or find any diplomacy, appeasement, summits etc? I don't believe we did? All we heard was bullying language from the start, oh and pestering Japan, CHina and anyone else he could find to put pressure on N K.. That's probably the issue here..
The last four administrations have tried every angle, approach,as well as every form of arm twisting and brow beating with the North Koreans. Nothing seems to work when you find yourself dealing with unyielding, uncompromising, unrelenting fanaticism. I take very seriously their threats as the N. Koreans with a huge standing army of their own, are backed by the Chinese who as we know have a nuclear arsenal and a standing army of more than 2 million. A lesson of history: People will do exactly what they think they can get away with whether it involves Guam or any other location.
Well that's your *opinion* just saying.. it's opinion rather than fact. In my belief system and my morals it's kinda not very nice of you to say that really.. to be honest it's distinctly unkind. I appreciate you seem to have a beef with the OP but personally I get kinda tired of seeing you bitching at her. Just saying
What's "unkind" about it? She posts fiery rhetoric at least once a day every single day, then she asks about people expressing fiery rhetoric. Is it also unkind of her to post fiery rhetoric, or is it just fine because you agree with her? You're absolutely correct about your rights to be tired of something that I do, and I am tired of what she does. You are not tired of what she does, and you do not have to be. You expressed that you're tired of something, and I express that I'm tired of something. Perhaps you and I are more alike in that respext than first glance belies. __
This post was edited by Randy D at August 11, 2017 11:57 AM MDT
OK so you asked and I respect you enough to consider you deserve an honest answer.. so here goes. My feeling is that by continually commenting on her posts in a far from positive tone, that is akin to targeting her, singling her out for this other than positive attention.
That's unkind imo.. and I feel that you have sometimes sailed quite close to the bone with some of the comments.. I accept that my morals and mores seem to be somewhat different to those generally experienced over there.. not saying good or bad necessarily but different for sure.. that wouldn't be seen as acceptable, it's unkind.. I accept that things seem to be different there? And I accept too that sometimes when *I* have meant something entirely innocently and lacking in unkindness people here have become mad at me - so I can only assume that something that would be acceptable here is not always so there. etc..
I just don't get, I suppose, why, if you don't like her rhetoric and questions you don't just ignore them.. skip over them.. You are entitled to comment, just as anyone else is.. but it seems somewhat negative and, unkind, to deliberately seek to post only quite derogatory, in tone, comments on her posts.. Just saying.. I also feel that we are all entitled to post as much as we want.. we could post 20 or so questions every day if we wanted, about whatever we like.. it's not a crime.. it's freedom.. But the truth be told most of us are too lazy, too busy or too lacking in imagination to post more than a few questions at a time.. I count myself in on that one!
I appreciate you feel that is so, and you are entitled to your opinion. All I can think is that I must have missed something then as I have honestly, hand on heart never seen R say anything unkind other than that she disagrees with another poster... Just saying.. I am all for treating people well, and fairly.. and your comments skate very close to the wind in terms of being unkind. I appreciate there's a little un-fan base who would agree but personally it makes me feel uncomfortable that this behaviour is allowed.
It's not a feeling, it's a thought; there is a vast difference between the two.
There are people who have interacted with or at least read Rosie's posts for almost ten years who have differing experiences than yours. Yes, you have definitely missed something. You and Rosie frequently compliment each other, so she interacts with you in a positive way. There was a time when she was just as nice and kind and pleasant and complimentary with/to me, until, that is, the day I posted a viewpoint opposite of hers. You would have thought I advocated the reincarnation of Hitler or some such sin. All of a sudden, I became Public Enemy #1. Even though you state you've never read unkind words from her, A) it has happened, and B) nowadays she disguises her insults with gransmothetly witticisms and with questions about personality and character. One more thing, she proudly posts that her tactic is to ignore certain people, which is another reason that as a newer member, you haven't seen some of the stuff she pulls. It's interesting that you mentioned intelligent debate. Rosie claims it's what she wants, yet she usually only responds to people who agree with her. She doesn't debate, she because if anyone challenges her mindset, she merely blacklists them. Intelligence, maturity, respectful dialogue? I think one of the main reasons she's finally stopped all of her childish, immature name-calling was due to people like me pointing out that it was the exact opposite of intelligent debate, and that she was hypocritical for engaging in it! I count that as a victory, but did she ever post one word to any of us who attempted discourse with her! NO! We're beneath her because we do not grovel at her every word!
Some of what she posts are outright lies, and I call 'em as I see them. That makes me wrong and Rosie right, but only in a universe that I don't understand. Fine.
Adaydreambeliever 