Kazmr wrote:There's more in the article than just that, read the actual dialogue, the words themselves. I'm not going to go through line by line and point them out because that would defeat the purpose of the satire. There's a point to it, you just don't get it.
Naturally the article is cluttered with the notion that imperialists see defenders as colonial savages and behave like 19th-century equivalents. Obviously one does not accept that, hence why one obviously does not draw attention to the point in discussing your article - it is strange you expect me to do so.
That is however totally irrelevant, because the article suggests that TNI would add these regions to Schedule I and there is no basis to support this.
The mere presence of other material does not mitigate the misleading impression which you consciously and disingenuously seek to convey.
Kazmr wrote:That's fine. I'd just appreciate it, though, if you left it at that. You've made your case, no need to carry it further.
Evidently you are keen to close this discussion down.
If there is still a debate ongoing, then I have every right to consider the points which you have made.
<-- An example of the typical reaction
