when you jump in with an opinion that has no relation to reality and merely states a simplistic approach with no regard to the complexity of the world in which live, that ignores the facts then you can't expect to be taken seriously?
I feel for politicians, they have to provide simple answers that most people can understand, when the reality is there is no simple answer and the very people who carp at them are people who would not stick their necks on the line in any event, but fire off simple bar room solutions that don't stand up to any reasonable scrutiny.
My unrest as you put it, but more accurately my incredulity is at being able to defend or even state an opinion about a topic which the person giving the opinion clearly hasn't got a basic understanding of.
Nor i am I wrong that it is a well researched fact that people will blindly stick to an opinion or a belief they hold even when its proven beyond reasonable doubt that the opinion or belief that they have is wrong.
If you don't believe me google "Why do people stick to their opinion even when proven to be wrong" there is plenty of evidence to back me up, or read a book entitled "You are not so smart" there is also a blog, which is very illuminating.
As for respect, why would I crave the respect of someone whose answer to a historical perspective, that but for 22 miles of sea, the UK would have gone the same way as France, was to rumble on about being unpatriotic and disrespecting the generation that fought in WW2?
Especially when i made no reference to the efforts or bravery of those that fought, but was merely referring to the factors that assisted the UK from remaining free of german occupation.
Agree
I agree that you can agree although others might disagree that I should agree although I very much disagree with any suggestions that I should disagree when I had stated I wanted to agree.
I hope I'm not being disagreeable.