Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. UN Security Council drafting angry letter

UN Security Council drafting angry letter

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
csharpsecurityquestionannouncement
22 Posts 4 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Lost User

    I questioned "western" because the Shah had removed democracy (hence the quote). You then revealed that your use of "western" meant the Western tradition from Attic Greece to the 21st century. Seeing that we were at cross purposes, I explained what I meant by "western" and why, to me, the Shah was not "western".

    Oakman wrote:

    I would've thought that you would have asked for my definition

    I didn't have to, you had already indicated it (the Western tradition from Attic Greece to the 21st century).

    Oakman wrote:

    Then why did you introduce their national heritage into the discussion at all?

    You introduced NAZI Germany. I said, flippantly, that it was more Nordic than Western. You seemed to assume that I meant Fascism was Nordic, and introduced Italy and Spain.

    Oakman wrote:

    rather than introducing one that, I am afraid, seems to have changed from one of your posts to the next.

    I hope you don't mean the nice guys thing, that was yours not mine: "Unless you insist on defining "western" as nice guys who wouldn't hurt a fly."

    Oakman wrote:

    You decided that I meant 'favoring Democracy'

    No, I explained that I meant 'being a democracy'.

    Oakman wrote:

    and have been trying to convince me that I meant what you thought rather than what I thought I meant.

    How could I? Why would I even try?

    Oakman wrote:

    Something along the lines of a Graeco-Roman Classical and Renaissance cultural influence, concerning artistic, philosophic, literary, and legal themes and traditions, as well as a tradition of rationalism in various spheres of life, developed by Hellenistic philosophy, Scholasticism, Humanisms, the Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment, and, yes indeed, a leaning towards freedom of thought and widespread suffrage.

    The Western tradition, I got that.

    Oakman wrote:

    I stand by my definition of the word, and my application of it to the last Shah of Iran.

    And I prefer my more exclusive definition of the word.

    Bob Emmett

    O Offline
    O Offline
    Oakman
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Bob Emmett wrote:

    And I prefer my more exclusive incorrect definition of the word.

    FTFY ;)

    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

    L 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • O Oakman

      Bob Emmett wrote:

      And I prefer my more exclusive incorrect definition of the word.

      FTFY ;)

      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      Oakman wrote:

      FTFY

      If it ain't broke ... :)

      Bob Emmett

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      Reply
      • Reply as topic
      Log in to reply
      • Oldest to Newest
      • Newest to Oldest
      • Most Votes


      • Login

      • Don't have an account? Register

      • Login or register to search.
      • First post
        Last post
      0
      • Categories
      • Recent
      • Tags
      • Popular
      • World
      • Users
      • Groups