Cyprus-Forum.com

[Garavnoss]

"Incidentally, since you suggest that the "Poll" is now closed, I would point out that "Cowards do not fight", they are usually afraid to, only those who possess a certain degree of "Courage" would be prepared to die for a cause which THEY believe in.

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.

You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.

I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one.,

[Garavnoss]

I am of the opinion that this "POLL" has been compromised by the views of the one who raised it.

In the first instance, the opening invitation suggested that the outcome would be in HIS favour.

The subject matter of the "POLL" has been clouded by events which do not fairly focus on "Courage".

Those who do not agree with the raiser are subjected to scathingly abusive attacks, (they may fear such intimidation).

The raiser has admitted that he even voted in opposition to his own beliefs. (an act of dishonesty which suggests manipulation).

Therefore, due to the above infringements of fair play, I consider the "POLL" of no consequence and invalid.

I would invite members to consider the ground-rules for the presentation of any "POLL", the first of which is "Impartiality"

Idiot you are ! I voted Yes by mistake you fool. Im a positive man, and made a genuine error which I posted on the thread in question.
This thread is now CLOSED.

You do not have enough authority to CLOSE this thread, you cannot even control your brain spasms, cool down mate, and by the way, I think you should remove the word "Debate" from your written rampages of wrath and rage, you do not know the meaning of the word, stick to what you are best at, insult and gutter sniping.

[miltiades]

"Incidentally, since you suggest that the "Poll" is now closed, I would point out that "Cowards do not fight", they are usually afraid to, only those who possess a certain degree of "Courage" would be prepared to die for a cause which THEY believe in.

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.

You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.

You talk some rubbish dont you. These savages mate are driven by a warped ideology, they are in someones country comitting the most gruesome acts.
Now give it up, the poll finishes tomorrow and I shall officialy present the results.
Post something of minute intelligence, you may just hit 1000 views, such a shame that an eloquent man such as you are , continually posts rubbish.



I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one.,

[MR-from-NG]

"Incidentally, since you suggest that the "Poll" is now closed, I would point out that "Cowards do not fight", they are usually afraid to, only those who possess a certain degree of "Courage" would be prepared to die for a cause which THEY believe in.

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.

You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.

I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one.,

Sounds familiar. Does ROC bullying TC's come to mind? Turkey giving the ROC "a good boot in the backside"

[Garavnoss]

"Incidentally, since you suggest that the "Poll" is now closed, I would point out that "Cowards do not fight", they are usually afraid to, only those who possess a certain degree of "Courage" would be prepared to die for a cause which THEY believe in.

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.

You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.

I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one.,

Sounds familiar. Does ROC bullying TC's come to mind? Turkey giving the ROC "a good boot in the backside"

One would have to be fair and agree that the young Turkish troops would have to be in possession of a certain amount of "Courage" to engage in battle, a "Cowardly " soldier would be of little use in ANY engagement although (as indicated earlier) if a greater force imposes it's will upon a lesser one, perhaps the degree of "Courage" would be less but, nonetheless it would still be "Courage".

I am at a loss to understand how so many seem to be incapable of attributing "Courage" to a fighter of ANY cause, surely it MUST be a prerequisite to take up arms even if the cause is an unjust one.

Try strapping an explosive device around your waist (since it seems we are only concerned with Jihadists) and emulate their actions without "Courage", I maintain it is not possible and that DOES NOT mean that I am in agreement with such awful events.

A "Cowardly Act" (as WE perceive it to be) if we are to focus on the Jihadists, would still require "Courage" to carry it out.

We should not be so focused on the Jihadists, THIS topic should focus on "Courage" and nothing else.

A "Coward" dies a thousand times, a "Courageous" man tastes of death but once (or something like that) = "Cowards" do not fight.

[Garavnoss]

"Incidentally, since you suggest that the "Poll" is now closed, I would point out that "Cowards do not fight", they are usually afraid to, only those who possess a certain degree of "Courage" would be prepared to die for a cause which THEY believe in.

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.

You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.

You talk some rubbish dont you. These savages mate are driven by a warped ideology, they are in someones country comitting the most gruesome acts.
Now give it up, the poll finishes tomorrow and I shall officialy present the results.
Post something of minute intelligence, you may just hit 1000 views, such a shame that an eloquent man such as you are , continually posts rubbish.



I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one.,

Have a look at the above exchanges, you cannot even make a proper reply without attributing YOUR drivel to another member, it would appear that you have contributed NOTHING due to your inability to separate the quotes, quite compatible with your debating skills in actual fact.

I suppose you are busy manipulating others (or begging for votes ), too late mate, I've declared the "POLL" invalid due to many discrepancies, it would appear that the count has been compromised and there is evidence of "Jiggery Pokery" in the votes cast.

In future, do NOT raise "Polls", you are not competent to do so.

[MR-from-NG]

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.[/quote]


You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.[/quote]

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.[/quote]



I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one., [/quote]

Sounds familiar. Does ROC bullying TC's come to mind? Turkey giving the ROC "a good boot in the backside" [/quote]


One would have to be fair and agree that the young Turkish troops would have to be in possession of a certain amount of "Courage" to engage in battle, a "Cowardly " soldier would be of little use in ANY engagement although (as indicated earlier) if a greater force imposes it's will upon a lesser one, perhaps the degree of "Courage" would be less but, nonetheless it would still be "Courage".

I am at a loss to understand how so many seem to be incapable of attributing "Courage" to a fighter of ANY cause, surely it MUST be a prerequisite to take up arms even if the cause is an unjust one.

Try strapping an explosive device around your waist (since it seems we are only concerned with Jihadists) and emulate their actions without "Courage", I maintain it is not possible and that DOES NOT mean that I am in agreement with such awful events.

A "Cowardly Act" (as WE perceive it to be) if we are to focus on the Jihadists, would still require "Courage" to carry it out.

We should not be so focused on the Jihadists, THIS topic should focus on "Courage" and nothing else.

A "Coward" dies a thousand times, a "Courageous" man tastes of death but once (or something like that) = "Cowards" do not fight.[/quote]

I agree and understand your point. Milti is a person I speak to frequently and have had the pleasure of sharing a bottle of red with. He is a good man, he is wise and has only good intentions for Cyprus and the rest of our planet. I have ben following your exchanges and you both have valid points.

One question if I may. How do you feel about suicide in general? Say somebody tops himself from financial or marital problems etc etc, would he/she be a person of courage or cowardice?

[Garavnoss]

MR-from-NG, Thank you for your input and, since you have invited my views on "Suicide", I feel I should respond.

If the focus is on the "Suicide Bomber", I would have to concede that I am not really able to venture an opinion on the frame of mind at the time of the action, unfortunately there are none that survive that could enlighten us on what their feelings were before the event.

Devotion to their faith, the futility of their future, their desire to draw attention to their plight, their feelings of hopelessness or desperation are ALL theories that have been put forward (among others) to determine whether the action is a "Courageous" one or not.

The ONLY valid reasons I can see for such a desperate act are described above but, if one considers the depth of devotion to their faith (and as non participants we can only guess), perhaps the fear of life without their faith, is greater than the fear of death with it.

It is even fair to imagine (although it might be beyond our comprehension) that the taking of the lives of their fellow beings, would seem to them to be a release from the tyrannies of those whom they deem to be oppressing them and that those that die at their hands did not have the "Courage" to emulate the bomber. (just a thought).

As to "Suicide" as WE see it, there are again various camps of thought and unless one is a Theologian, the question of whether it is "Courageous " or "Cowardly" is a moot point.

I personally think that it would depend upon circumstances and would present two views on the same subject although "Death" would be the result in both cases.

To a devout Catholic, the taking of one's life would be regarded as a "Cowardly" act and it would not matter what the circumstances were that drove the person to such action, it would be expected that the one contemplating "Suicide" should turn to God for guidance.

Suffering from the result of a Marriage break-up, a Business failure and a variety of other reasons can drive a person to contemplate suicide but, if a person is NOT a follower of any particular faith (or does not believe in the existence of God in ANY form) then (in my own opinion) since there is no prospect of any afterlife and only oblivion is envisaged, I would suggest that it would take a certain amount of "Courage" to end one's life.

One could cite cases where illness, bad luck and a host of other afflictions could drive one to commit "Suicide", I think my own view would be that it would require "Courage" even in the event of one acting out of a sense of duty (as often is the case in the military).

[miltiades]

Would you not agree on THAT small point ?.

No I bloody well do NOT agree. Use your loaf man
A mentally deranged gunman walks into a school and indiscriminately shoots and kills children. Is he brave or is he, like ISIS, fucking lunatic.

You again avoid the issue by linking the actions of IS with the question of "Courage", quite a separate subject actually.[/quote]

Why don't you start your own poll.

No one respects DAESH as having courage as you insinuate. Put it o the test.[/quote]



I have NEVER indicated any interest in DAESH in any of my comments, however, if they are involved in a struggle (for whatever cause) I would have to concede that they too MUST be equipped with a certain degree of "Courage".

In MY view, any superior force which imposes it's will (or even seeks to) on a lesser force, requires LESS "Courage" than the underdog, the pages of history are littered with classic examples of "The Bully" ending up with a good boot in the backside, the Yanks have had a few in their time and it is MY guess that they are heading for another one., [/quote]

Sounds familiar. Does ROC bullying TC's come to mind? Turkey giving the ROC "a good boot in the backside" [/quote]


One would have to be fair and agree that the young Turkish troops would have to be in possession of a certain amount of "Courage" to engage in battle, a "Cowardly " soldier would be of little use in ANY engagement although (as indicated earlier) if a greater force imposes it's will upon a lesser one, perhaps the degree of "Courage" would be less but, nonetheless it would still be "Courage".

I am at a loss to understand how so many seem to be incapable of attributing "Courage" to a fighter of ANY cause, surely it MUST be a prerequisite to take up arms even if the cause is an unjust one.

Try strapping an explosive device around your waist (since it seems we are only concerned with Jihadists) and emulate their actions without "Courage", I maintain it is not possible and that DOES NOT mean that I am in agreement with such awful events.

A "Cowardly Act" (as WE perceive it to be) if we are to focus on the Jihadists, would still require "Courage" to carry it out.

We should not be so focused on the Jihadists, THIS topic should focus on "Courage" and nothing else.

A "Coward" dies a thousand times, a "Courageous" man tastes of death but once (or something like that) = "Cowards" do not fight.[/quote]

I agree and understand your point. Milti is a person I speak to frequently and have had the pleasure of sharing a bottle of red with. He is a good man, he is wise and has only good intentions for Cyprus and the rest of our planet. I have ben following your exchanges and you both have valid points.

One question if I may. How do you feel about suicide in general? Say somebody tops himself from financial or marital problems etc etc, would he/she be a person of courage or cowardice?[/quote]
Excellent response M , why did I not think of it !!

[Get Real!]

The idiot can’t even get his quoting right despite having been here for like 10 years!

What a waste of space…