Thank you for your comment.
His posts:
In the first quote above, the word 'the' is significant. For example, "some Romanians" and "the Romanians" imply two different population sizes. That, followed by "fcuked up ... nasty people" is offensive (to me). While some Indians are indeed "fcuked up" and "nasty," there are always good people amidst the set, which makes "the Indian people" an overgeneralization. In the second quote, his nebulosity is an excuse for another generalization. Claiming something to be true without knowing the reality behind it is considered an offense, even here in the U.S. If I make a "probable claim" (about a population of people or some scientific work etc.), I should be able to back up that claim with reasonable logic. If I cannot, I have a high probability of offending some individuals within the population in question. The statement "there's no traffic lights in India" paints a picture of some backward civilization, and while some aspects of that country need improvement (e.g. the caste system), it is certainly not so backward to lack traffic signals.
Secondly, my original statement below was not an overreaction. I was simply letting him know how I feel:
In response to that, instead of clarifying himself, he mocks my word choice by questioning the inventiveness of it. It was not until later that he apologized and corrected the overgeneralization by editing his post.
I have Asperger's Syndrome, and I find this discussion difficult to follow. I don't understand how the above has anything to do with our discussion. My response would have been exactly the same even if he was not Deaf.
Exactly! How many people post things like "Nasty Americans" all the time?! 
