A pretty good quote too. Not sure the point you are trying to make there.

I think i've made my points clear.
if you dont want to even watch the video or admit there was a list of talking points from which you pulled and took out of context to mischaracterize and belittle them and go on some bizarre tangent about the kurds there is not much i can do there. Listen more closely to what was actually said instead of rushing to take issue with something and you will be more likely to understand what i am referring to.

Yes pulling out is probably bad for the Kurds. No, that doesn't mean it should be a primary talking point or point of interest for libertarians concerned with peace and ending the perpetual war state.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Dec 21 2018 03:19pm

have you considered, as a libertarian generally and anti-war person, that i might have listened to and agreed with almost all of the general points the two made and, rather than cherrypicking something in a disingenuous manner, that i simply spoke about one of the few things i disagreed with? i suppose i could have tossed in a "i generally agree with them" at the start.

when you have to pepper in stuff like "to belittle them" or "bizarre tangent" it does give me a wave of nostalgia to when you posted in PARD more. i do respect a bit of sally afterall.

the point i was making is Smith, especially in that quote, is showing he's entirely macro focused. the pullout hasn't even happened yet, the Kurds might get entirely genocided, etc. and we have a massive tax cut and 2 conservative justices that are likely to decide in a way Smith would like.

i've listened to hundreds of hours of Smith via many of the podcasts he's on. Bonfire, Skeptic tank, etc. i respect him generally but find a lot of his points shallow and seeking mainstream appeal. he's too macro focused generally for my taste, and this one part of the video exemplified it.



this part simply isn't true. we all know the neocons are there and still will be in a few decades. how we leave the Middle east and in what state are another indicator of if/when we'll get dragged back.

the idea that it simply doesn't matter, even given that slimmer context, is wrong.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 21 2018 03:27pm

We've already established that you haven't listened to let alone agreed with 'almost all of what he had to say', with timestamps to prove it.

Yes there was something you wanted to take issue with, and I have established that you have done so on shady grounds by clipping it out of context and omitting words to paint an inaccurate picture of that portion of the discussion. Both can be true.

He also didnt discuss the talking points about putin and iran, despite them also being mentioned in the same sentence, because those also weren't the real points of the interview

Libertarians desperately need mainstream appeal for the sake of the species. i dont necessarily consider that a bad thing.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Dec 21 2018 03:32pm

selfishness is never going to be seen as a virtue tbh

Actually we established that at the time I posted my original critique I hadn't yet listened to the video. having been more than 24 mins since u posted it, well your point is gone.

im not sure why you think it's out of context, nor that i omitted anything. i did shorten it so that i wouldnt have to transcript it. in a post later i admitted that TDS is relevant, but that i have a problem with skipping over the Kurds, not sure what's shady. but that could just be old Cam embellishment for panache.



on that note, intra-parties i agree. Intra-libertarians tho he's bland and we all know it. he adds the standup angle and that's his real appeal.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 21 2018 03:37pm

Lets use an analogy.
We are in a thread about discussing the state of discourse on PaRd and saucyISIS6000 is brought up.
I mention that he is a poster of exceptionally low quality and list off a number of things he has talked about like cheering on school shooters, his illwishes towards americans, and his incapability of staying on topic, making a coherent point or understanding what anyone is saying before condemning them.

In response you say 'yeah thats really pathetic' and agree that he is a terrible presence in this subforum and go on to discuss the poor quality of many discussions here.

Would it be fair for someone to come in and say 'wow screw that snipa guy. Cam brought up school shootings and snipa is dodging the issue as usual.' while only posting quotes of the exact portion of the sentence that mentions shootings and then paraphrasing you as brushing it off with something unrelated?
Or is that misleading and our topic and method of discussion was valid, even if shootings are worth discussing on their own?

Thats my bit of creative writing for the day i guess.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Dec 21 2018 03:55pm

at bold, lol'd

at underlined, always.

yeah I get your point, we generally agree and I omitted that portion, and should have added that I generally agree with the video. id add that I find a conversation that long on TDS to be circle jerky. its a valid but obvious among libertarians (liberal hypocrisy) imo it's not all that strong of a point. I still think there's a cost/benefit analysis that leans in favor of staying or withdrawing differently. making the Kurds (or whoever is left) another ISIS that we also armed and we're not safer and have to spend the same to defend. right now we're cheering the turks to slaughter the kurds, even with general principle that's a bit over the icky line for me.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 21 2018 05:10pm

Thats actually the entire culture right on the left right now. Virtue without sacrifice.

The issue with libertarians is they arent in touch with their emotions. They cant inspire.

hardcore