Not exactly. The salient point here would be that you were wrong. Cop-outs never sound as compelling in print as they do when you rehearse them in your head, do they?



Ahk

So this is your game then? Your MO? You decide to shift out of every debate by declaring people are insulting you, or failing that when you get a completely reasonable response you think you're fooling people by copping out? Do you think, the next time you decide to characterize NATO's response in Iraq as a "war of aggression" or that the response to 9/11 is revenge and nothing more I'll be right there witht he same pesky points. So you can either answer 'em now or later. doesn't matter to me.

I guess you figure you can just make the definitions yourself and expect people not to argue them. That's the point to an open forum or weren't you aware of that? Are you used to an environment where you are never questioned? Are you used to an environment where you do not need to think because there'll always be a bunch of "friends" right there to back you up?


I guess you figure a 'debate' is to simply proclaim anything you like and any conflicting views you don't have to deal with?

Why not simply discuss with a wall? Your arguments might sound more compelling then without all the pesky questions and counter views.





Ahk