he like some people on the "other side" think that no matter what "their side" is always right the "other side" is ALWAYS wrong with nothing in between. that's why people like him never get many normal and decent responses. they are incapable of pointing out anything negative on "their side" nor anything positive on the "other side" and it just seems like you are trying to converse with a brick wall.
May I ask, how is that ANY different with people from the left? What you describe pretty much holds true for anyone here.
the default assumption here is that texxx is serious, which meh. You could program a script that runs in and out of threads on any global issue and declares "It's Obama's fault" along with a few stock responses and that'd be about as good as texxx. It would probably be a better script than the original if it scraped the latest articles on right-wing leaning websites about the particular topic. Use texxx as a device to highlight your points and to chuckle around with, you'll have plenty of fun--robots are designed that way With that said, texxx is very right about NATO overusing force in Libya, not that I think he thinks that way about it. In other instances, the worst you can posit is a misuse of American soft power, and previous foreign policy failures in the region (almost a default assumption in the ME)
that's what i meant with the first line (people on the "other side) meaning left do the same thing. every single thing bush did was horrible, with zero middle ground regarding his 8 years.
We have the benefit of hindsight on the Russian and Chinese revolutions. Would you say they were disasters?
For the millions and millions of people who lost their lives to just Stalin and Mao alone? Yes. Historically, could something better have happened? You would think so, but we can't know unless we ran the experiment with hundreds of parallel earths.
