Replies

Tell me. Are you honestly incapable of distinguishing between your own personal opinion of Kofi Annan's statement and the bigger picture of what others believe? After reading the downright bizarre lengths you go to debate the silliest trivialities, I may only conclude as much.

Nevertheless, try reading what you posted previously. You stated:

"I still don't see Kofi's opinion as being significant," to which any rational person would take as the expression of a personal belief that Kofi Annan's opinion lacks the significance needed to influence ones own. Insofar as my personal beliefs go as well, I agreed with you, as is signified in my response "Personally, neither do I." I then noted that others give significance to Annan's opinion, believe it to have merit and sway on their own opinions, and may even be willing to act in his favor. That is a simple fact of reality and cannot be ignored on the grounds that you or I don't like it.

Evidently you have yet to grasp this last part as you are still debating with yourself over an erronious semantical construct of trivial proportions. And you wonder why some here question your sanity...

Tell me. Are you honestly incapable of distinguishing between your own personal opinion of Kofi Annan's statement and the bigger picture of what others believe? After reading the downright bizarre lengths you go to debate the silliest trivialities, I may only conclude as much.

I merely said that his opinion is insignificant. The state of insignificance has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with his opinion. His opinion is insignificant because at the moment, the UN is merely an anti-US, anti-America debating society with little military power outside of US help.

Nevertheless, try reading what you posted previously. You stated: "I still don't see Kofi's opinion as being significant," to which any rational person would take as the expression of a personal belief that Kofi Annan's opinion lacks the significance needed to influence ones own. Insofar as my personal beliefs go as well, I agreed with you, as is signified in my response "Personally, neither do I." I then noted that others give significance to Annan's opinion, believe it to have merit and sway on their own opinions, and may even be willing to act in his favor. That is a simple fact of reality and cannot be ignored on the grounds that you or I don't like it.

So since you believe that Kofi's opinion is significant, for whatever reason, you shouldn't have said his opinion is insignificant. I believe his opinion is insignificant because I don't believe his opinion makes a difference here to enough people. You do, and that's where we disagree.

Evidently you have yet to grasp this last part as you are still debating with yourself over an erronious semantical construct of trivial proportions. And you wonder why some here question your sanity...

No, you're confusing agreement with significance. I'm sure there are a lot of foreigners that I would agree with, but that wouldn't make their opinions any more significant.

And the only people that question my sanity are those that think slavery abolitionists are crazy.

Also, as I've said to you before on other threads, most other people's opinion are insignificant to me personally as well, even if I agree with them. That's another big difference between you and I. You base your opinion heavily on other people's opinion. I form my opinion myself using my discernment and then look for those who agree with me to support. Big difference. So even if Kofi said that the UN cannot rule pover the American people over the Constitution, his opinion would still be insignificant overall and to me personally even though I would agree with him.