Dear Moderator

[Micah Mileto]

11 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

 

Psychology is a pseudoscience for morons that don't have any evidence, and psychiatry is the holocaust.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Micah Mileto

[W. Niederhut]

9 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Psychology is a pseudoscience for morons that don't have any evidence, and psychiatry is the holocaust.

Micah,

     Have you considered seeking treatment for your severe case of Dunning Kruger Syndrome? 🙄

[John Cotter]

37 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

     I thought you were taking a welcome break from posting your inane insults on this forum.  🙄

     As for Thomas Szasz, one of my old associates here at the University of Colorado, Dr. Robert Freedman, always referred Szasz as an anti-psychiatric "gadfly."  (Bob Freedman eventually became our department Chairman and editor of the prestigious American Journal of Psychiatry.)

    There has long been a popular genre of pseudo-intellectual, anti-psychiatric literature out there-- some of which has been funded and promoted by the Scientology movement.  Alternatively, it has been promoted by people selling snake oil.  Most of it is predicated on the prevalent denial of mental illnesses-- people who believe, rather oddly, that the human brain is not subject to the same potential physiological fallibilities (congenital and/or acquired) as every other organ in the body.

    As for your oft-referenced Rosenhans joke-- what did it teach you about the phenomenology of mental disorders, other than the fact that people can pretend to suffer from auditory hallucinations?  Big deal.

    Do you, therefore, infer that some mentally ill people do not experience hallucinations?

    Your ignorance of psychiatry reminds me of RFK, Jr.'s ignorance of virology and immunology.

     A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

William,

Thank you for validating the contents of my post by your failure to logically rebut any of it.

[Kirk Gallaway]

Oh, Hey welcome back Cotter!,

Confirmation bias is somewhat rampant on this forum but Cotter takes it to the extreme. He wants to get back at W. Spends hours trying to make his "one flew over the cuckoo" case,finds authors to confirm his bias but inevitably  shoots back the same old phrases like

 

You apparently missed the Open Democracy article dated 28th February 2022 by Anthony Barnett titled, “Putin was shaped by US greed. His defeat must lead to change”

 

You also apparently missed the Aljazeera article dated 30th March 2022 by Justin Bronkata.

 

Like we'd all read the same garbage he reads.

****

On another topic , I must say I do find curious the emotional proclivities from some of those across the pond, like Cotter.

Here Cotter was so entrenched in his tribalism, he was blind and stood silent when a child member of his tribe was completely destroying the discourse of the 56 year thread and then is so outraged when it's finally dissolved!

 

But later the he gushingly says WELCOME BACK MATTHEW.!  Is Cotter?  as a  69 year old man "grooming" Koch or is he Koch's groupie and sees Koch as a next generation Johnny Depp?

heh heh

 

Cliff you dared to soil some of Cotter's vision of the America's Deep State  full spectrum dominance by reminding him of some of the U.S. policy failures.

 

There's probably no example of America's full spectrum dominance  that has ever been so successful and complete than our our deep state full spectrum indoctrination of American Exceptionalism has with Brits, Cotter, Rigby  and Barnard. To them there's absolutely nothing the American Deep State can't do and get away with complete impunity. Stick a fork in all 3 of them. They are psychologically helpless before us,  never to get out of the starting gate. The battle was won  without ever firing a shot. We left them nothing, lives sterile of all value, wondering what happened,  and  condemned to just chirp away in conspiracy forums.

 

 

heh heh again

[John Cotter]

44 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Oh, Hey welcome back Cotter!,

Confirmation bias is somewhat rampant on this forum but Cotter takes it to the extreme. He wants to get back at W. Spends hours trying to make his "one flew over the cuckoo" case,finds authors to confirm his bias but inevitably  shoots back the same old phrases like

 

You apparently missed the Open Democracy article dated 28th February 2022 by Anthony Barnett titled, “Putin was shaped by US greed. His defeat must lead to change”

 

You also apparently missed the Aljazeera article dated 30th March 2022 by Justin Bronkata.

 

Like we'd all read the same garbage he reads.

****

On another topic , I must say I do find curious the emotional proclivities from some of those across the pond, like Cotter.

Here Cotter was so entrenched in his tribalism, he was blind and stood silent when a child member of his tribe was completely destroying the discourse of the 56 year thread and then is so outraged when it's finally dissolved!

 

But later the he gushingly says WELCOME BACK MATTHEW.!  Is Cotter?  as a  69 year old man "grooming" Koch or is he Koch's groupie and sees Koch as a next generation Johnny Depp?

heh heh

 

Cliff you dared to soil some of Cotter's vision of the America's Deep State  full spectrum dominance by reminding him of some of the U.S. policy failures.

 

There's probably no example of America's full spectrum dominance  that has ever been so successful and complete than our our deep state full spectrum indoctrination of American Exceptionalism has with Brits, Cotter, Rigby  and Barnard. To them there's absolutely nothing the American Deep State can't do and get away with complete impunity. Stick a fork in all 3 of them. They are psychologically helpless before us,  never to get out of the starting gate. The battle was won  without ever firing a shot. We left them nothing, lives sterile of all value, wondering what happened,  and  condemned to just chirp away in conspiracy forums.

 

 

heh heh again

Thanks for that post, Kirk. It gave me a good laugh on a Monday evening. Keep them coming. I hope you're still enjoying your holiday and get home safely.

[Cliff Varnell]

11 hours ago, John Cotter said:

You seem to have a hysteria problem. Perhaps you should consult Dr Niederhut.

Oh, so you *do* want to engage.

Fine.  You contend the Eastern expansion of NATO was a function of hegemonic/monolithic American world domination.

I asked you to reconcile that view with: Cuba kicking the US out in ‘59, Vietnam in ‘75, Nicaragua and Iran in ‘79, Lebanon in ‘82, Iraq in ‘11, Afghanistan in ‘21.  (Those last two wars cost 8 trillion dollars and a million deaths and left Afghanistan in the hands of the Taliban and Iraq closer to Iran than the US.)

Also: the 2014 Obama-Putin negotiated destruction of Syrian chemical weapon stockpiles; the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal; the 2016 opening to Cuba; the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan.

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[W. Niederhut]

4 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Oh, so you *do* want to engage.

Fine.  You contend the Eastern expansion of NATO was a function of hegemonic/monolithic American world domination.

I asked you to reconcile that view with: Cuba kicking the US out in ‘59, Vietnam in ‘75, Nicaragua and Iran in ‘79, Lebanon in ‘82, Iraq in ‘11, Afghanistan in ‘21.  (Those last two wars cost 8 trillion dollars and a million deaths and left Afghanistan in the hands of the Taliban and Iraq closer to Iran than the US.)

Also: the 2014 Obama-Putin negotiated destruction of Syrian chemical weapon stockpiles; the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal; the 2016 opening to Cuba; the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan.

 

Indeed, Cliff, and the other awkward truth about NATO expansion is how eager the nations of the former Soviet Bloc have been to join NATO and the EU.

Their interest in joining the prosperous democracies of the EU is inconsistent with the Russia Today narrative decrying U.S. oppression and "full spectrum dominance."

Who are the "oppressors" in Europe today, other than Putin and Lukashenko?

[John Cotter]

30 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Oh, so you *do* want to engage.

Fine.  You contend the Eastern expansion of NATO was a function of hegemonic/monolithic American world domination.

I asked you to reconcile that view with: Cuba kicking the US out in ‘59, Vietnam in ‘75, Nicaragua and Iran in ‘79, Lebanon in ‘82, Iraq in ‘11, Afghanistan in ‘21.  (Those last two wars cost 8 trillion dollars and a million deaths and left Afghanistan in the hands of the Taliban and Iraq closer to Iran than the US.)

Also: the 2014 Obama-Putin negotiated destruction of Syrian chemical weapon stockpiles; the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal; the 2016 opening to Cuba; the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan.

 

There's a difference between having a policy of global domination and the successful implementation of that policy.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

There's a difference between having a policy of global domination and the successful implementation of that policy.

John, you said NATO was an “instrument” of the American “core tenet” of world domination.  Add up the repeated failures of American regime change policies — and the instances of peaceful American negotiations in Syria, Iran, Cuba and Afghanistan — and clearly America does not exercise hegemonic/monolithic world domination.

That’s your weak tea justification for denying the peoples of the former Soviet Bloc the Human Right of self-determination.

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

John, you said NATO was an “instrument” of the American “core tenet” of world domination.  Add up the repeated failures of American regime change policies — and the instances of peaceful American negotiations in Syria, Iran, Cuba and Afghanistan — and clearly America does not exercise hegemonic/monolithic world domination.

That’s your weak tea justification for denying the peoples of the former Soviet Bloc the Human Right of self-determination.

Please don't misrepresent what I said. 

The question I asked was:

"Do you agree with the statement that the core tenet of US foreign policy is global domination?"

You left out the phrase "US foreign policy". You're persisting in ignoring the difference between policy and the successful implementation of that policy, despite my pointing it out.

Your strawmanning in that regard indicates that you're unable to rebut my actual argument.

Thanks for the validation.

 

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/29209-dear-moderator/?do=findComment&comment=503989

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by John Cotter

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Please don't misrepresent what I said. 

The question I asked was:

"Do you agree with the statement that the core tenet of US foreign policy is global domination?"

You left out the phrase "US foreign policy". You're persisting in ignoring the difference between policy and the successful implementation of that policy, despite my pointing it out.

Again:

You’re referring to the core tenet of Neo-cons, one faction among many within the American national security state.  

No, I don’t agree with the statement.  The Neo-cons do not currently run American foreign policy — as I’ve pointed out earlier.

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Your strawmanning in that regard indicates that you're unable to rebut my actual argument.

Your actual argument is wrong.  The peaceful negotiations with Syria, Iran, Cuba and Afghanistan were opposed by Neo-cons.

As I’ve pointed out repeatedly.

[John Cotter]

On 6/20/2023 at 2:03 AM, Cliff Varnell said:

Again:

You’re referring to the core tenet of Neo-cons, one faction among many within the American national security state.  

No, I don’t agree with the statement.  The Neo-cons do not currently run American foreign policy — as I’ve pointed out earlier.

Your actual argument is wrong.  The peaceful negotiations with Syria, Iran, Cuba and Afghanistan were opposed by Neo-cons.

As I’ve pointed out repeatedly.

Cliff,

The core tenet of US foreign policy for most of the past century is global domination. It was on that basis, for example, that the US dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki mainly to show the Russians how dangerous and ruthless it was. It was also on that basis that the US fought and won the Cold War.

Domination is never absolute. As Michael Polanyi wrote in his book Personal Knowledge (p 225), “Even men like Hitler and Stalin, who had perfected to the utmost the machinery of naked power, have never ceased to supplement it by a flow of public self-justification”.

The fact that the US failed to achieve absolute dominance and sometimes used “soft power” rather than brute force to achieve its ends doesn’t negate the fact of its global dominance.

The question of which faction within the US government apparatus is chiefly responsible for the US’s aggressive foreign policy is a red herring.

Edited June 21, 2023 by John Cotter

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

Cliff,

The core tenet of US foreign policy for most of the past century is global domination.

And the price the American people have paid in blood and treasure is incalculable.  

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

 

It was on that basis, for example, that the US dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki mainly to show the Russians how dangerous and ruthless it was. It was also on that basis that the US fought and won the Cold War.

I think I’ve outlined this effectively.

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

Domination is never absolute.

And now not popular.  The Neo-cons have been conned out of their natural home in the Republican Party.

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

 

As Michael Polanyi wrote in his book Personal Knowledge (p 225), “Even men like Hitler and Stalin, who had perfected to the utmost the machinery of naked power, have never ceased to supplement it by a flow of public self-justification”.

The fact that the US failed to achieve absolute dominance

This fact proves the Neo-con quest for world military domination is bankrupt.

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

 

and sometimes used “soft power” rather than brute force to achieve its ends doesn’t negate the fact of its global dominance.

This “soft power” was wielded by Obama in his second term and Biden in Afghanistan.  The Neo-con regime change policies are out of favor.

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

The question of which faction within the US government apparatus is chiefly responsible for the US’s aggressive foreign policy is a red herring.

And this is your justification for denying Eastern Europeans the Human Right of self-determination?

Where was this “aggressive foreign policy” in Syria ‘14, Iran ‘15, Cuba ‘16 and Afghanistan ‘21?  Regime change policies are in disfavor because of their disastrous consequences.

Putin pursued regime change in Ukraine and ended up with 800 miles of NATO on the Finnish border.

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War.

So did Biden.

The Neocons philosophy governs both parties, the GOP is a little worse.

Obama was passing gas when he said he was not going into Syria.

TImber Sycamore was one of the biggest CIA covert operations ever.

Against a secularist Middle East country.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War.

So did Biden.

Not the first one.  He voted no in ‘91.

And Biden opposed the Libya bombing.

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

The Neocons philosophy governs both parties, the GOP is a little worse.

I’ve mentioned this many times and all we get is deer-in-the-headlight eyes:

The Neo-cons were outraged by:  the Obama-Putin deal over Syrian chemical weapons; the Iran nuke deal; Obama’s visit to Cuba; Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan.

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Obama was passing gas when he said he was not going into Syria.

TImber Sycamore was one of the biggest CIA covert operations ever.

Against a secularist Middle East country.

And who can forget the Obama Red Line?

Obama vowed to militarily retaliate against Assad if chemical weapons were used by the Assad regime.  A chemical attack was subsequently reported.  The Neo-cons were anxious for Obama to follow thru.  Instead he kicked it to Congress — who didn’t want it.  Then Putin worked out a deal with Obama to remove and destroy Assad’s chem stockpiles.  The Neo-cons bitched about this for years after.

Edited June 21, 2023 by Cliff Varnell