My America

[Alawen Everywhere]

You realize that Orwell died 60 years ago, right? Three generations of impending doom!

Have you ever thought that maybe you should stop waiting to die and enjoy your youth?

[Taxi]

You realize that Orwell died 60 years ago, right? Three generations of impending doom!


Yep, just like watching a car crash in slow motion

[Gorgetrapper]

The US is draining its water at a crazy rate and when theyll run out of it theyre just gonna come here and take it, like theyre doing now with the oil in the middle east. Its like a blackhole folding on itself and Canada is going to get swallowed alongside it.


Well it's pretty much like this, if one country doesn't do it, another will. It's just delaying the inevitable end of the planet after the resources are used up.

It's what countries have been doing for years, taking over other countries because there is something there they want. Like, when Russia took over Afghanistan (and then the Taliban took it back over after years). They were hailed as heroes in their country, and then shortly after, the Taliban turned out WORSE than when Russia took over. Prevention, if Russia was prevented from taking over Afghanistan it would be possible that the Taliban would never have ever risen up to the position that they are in now. Then possibly, the US never would have had a "reason" to go over to the middle east etc etc.
I'm not going to get into it, but everything that is done has a snowballing effect.

It's going to happen one way or another, but prevention is just a delay to the eventual outcome of things.

[Taxi]

It's going to happen one way or another, but prevention is just a delay to the eventual outcome of things.

Or we could manage water and eco-systems sustainably but NOOOOOOOO! you had to be QUAID!

[Xenephex]

Taxi, do you also put all the Canadian soldiers lying in graves in Normandy in that toilet of yours? Or do you think they were wasting their time since they were thousands of miles from home.

Of course, since the only piece of 'hard' evidence you have actually produced (the rest is mostly propaganda crap that would make Michael Moore blush) is the list of U.N. Vetos by the U.S., and since that list primarily focused on Vetos regarding Israel, I suppose it's possible you think the holocaust was not that big a deal. Hard to figure out exactly where you're coming from.

Orwell also said, "People sleep peacefully in their beds because rough men are willing to do violence on their behalf."

Seriously, insulting all those who have risked (and often lost) their lives for their countries places you beneath contempt. To summon up one more quote - this from Joseph Welch to Senator Joseph McCarthy during the Army-McCarthy hearings of the 50's (another episode I'm sure you love to trumpet):

"You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"

[Taxi]

Seriously, insulting all those who have risked (and often lost) their lives for their countries places you beneath contempt. To summon up one more quote - this from Joseph Welch to Senator Joseph McCarthy during the Army-McCarthy hearings of the 50's (another episode I'm sure you love to trumpet):

"You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"

I stand by my picture of that guy trying to lift his head high with the rest of his body submerged in a toilet. There is plenty of soldiers who arent proud of what theyve done as soldiers and they dont need me to post some ironic picture to understand that, but it seems Alawen does.

In fact, i think thats the saddest part of soldier life i can think of. That some soldiers, faced with the reality that theyve lost their limbs, their friends, part of their sanity, killed people who had done nothing to deserve it, just to make some people who dont care about them in the least rich, they prefer to dig their heads in the sand and condemn more young people to the same fate.

[ShadowWulf]

United States Marine Corps. My dad was in the navy and died from chemicals (agent orange) he was exposed to in Vietnam. His dad was in the navy in World War II and in Korea. I am a veteran son of a veteran son of a veteran. Both of them are now buried in the Fort Snelling National Cemetery. (My grandpa died this spring.) I expect to join them in 50 or 60 years.

Very well, and much respect to your grandparents. My own line has served in WWI, Vietnam, and korea.

However, you like me are a descendant of those who died defending against known, direct and overt harm. Korea and Vietnam however, as with Panama, the Gulf, and several others are NOT the same fight, they are NOT fought for the same reason.

They are, and have been admitted to be, false and totally political or money making ventures. These actions do NOT serve the people but rather by their propagation, frequency and propaganda behind them serve to instead reinforce extreme nationalism, xenophobia, and fear.

You hold your head high for "serving" but it seems more by your ancestors actions do you hold yourself by. As of yet you have not, to my knowledge, done anything to directly defend and aid the people of America, outside the very few who directly profiteered from the actions via a bank statement.

I have nothing but respect for those who quietly serve acting silently yet critically in defense of their country (whatever country that may be FYI) but to harp upon passive acts of service as if it makes you a better judge of freedom or liberty, or to constantly remind people of your "status" is worthy of maybe not contempt but surely derision.

[Taxi]

I have nothing but respect for those who quietly serve acting silently yet critically in defense of their country (whatever country that may be FYI)

Thats the problem i have with the US military, when was the last time the US defended itself? Bombing water treatment facilities in Iraq is not self-defense.

Its on a permanent war economy and as soon as enemy du jour #1 is down, another is picked to take its place. Thats my main gripe, if the US was getting attacked and foreign tanks were in US streets, id probably head down there and help you guys fight. But i cant think of a US war i could support since WW2.

[ShadowWulf]

Thats the problem i have with the US military, when was the last time the US defended itself? Bombing water treatment facilities in Iraq is not self-defense.

Its on a permanent war economy and as soon as enemy du jour #1 is down, another is picked to take its place. Thats my main gripe, if the US was getting attacked and foreign tanks were in US streets, id probably head down there and help you guys fight. But i cant think of a US war i could support since WW2.

I might...MIGHT, add somalia to that honestly. Though not an act of self defense it was an act of debatable (and ill informed) honest aid and help. But that soon went to shit in a handbasket, nor was it profitable enough.

It does beg the question of Sierra Leone, the Congo, and several other places that could actually HONESTLY use a hand that have been not only neglected but actively buried, burned and forgotten by the majority of the Public and Press in the western world.

[Xenephex]

Jesus, Shadowwulf, do you even have the slightest inkling of the history of the Korean war? And while I'm not going to try to defend Vietnam, which was mis-guided, massively mis-managed and completely mis-understood by almost everyone, have you ever wondered why it is that Taxi even has a 'Vietnamese neighbor?' Why so many of us have so many Vietnamese neighbors? Ask them some time.

It's because the North Vietnamese communists, who many in my generation hailed as 'freedom fighters', in the end turned out to the murderous thugs that almost every communist government turns out to be, and as a result a boatload (literally) of people in South Vietnam were willing to risk their lives and lose everything they had to get the hell out of there (and come here) once the communists took over. Double ditto for Cambodia.

I could almost deal with your incredibly simplistic world view, but the underlying ignorance you guys display makes it hopeless to even try to engage in a hostile dialogue.

Going to the quote well one last time, Churchill (he's in Wikipedia if you don't know who he is), once called Mussolini a 'utensil.' He could only have described you idiots as 'sporks.'

Have fun; link a youtube video or something.

[Taxi]

And while I'm not going to try to defend Vietnam, which was mis-guided, massively mis-managed and completely mis-understood by almost everyone, have you ever wondered why it is that Taxi even has a 'Vietnamese neighbor?' Why so many of us have so many Vietnamese neighbors? Ask them some time.

It's because the North Vietnamese communists, who many in my generation hailed as 'freedom fighters', in the end turned out to the murderous thugs that almost every communist government turns out to be, and as a result a boatload (literally) of people in South Vietnam were willing to risk their lives and lose everything they had to get the hell out of there (and come here) once the communists took over. Double ditto for Cambodia.

I could almost deal with your incredibly simplistic world view, but the underlying ignorance you guys display makes it hopeless to even try to engage in a hostile dialogue.


Now look up who had to go invade cambodia and stop the Khmer Rouge.

The sole reason why there was a south/north vietnam, and north/south Korea is because the US prevented re-unification in both countries.

Ho Chi Minh was an american admirer and based his insurrection against the French colonialists on the american war of liberation against Britain.

Im tired but if you want ill look up the facts on why those are true and post them later on.

[ShadowWulf]

Jesus, Shadowwulf, do you even have the slightest inkling of the history of the Korean war? And while I'm not going to try to defend Vietnam, which was mis-guided, massively mis-managed and completely mis-understood by almost everyone, have you ever wondered why it is that Taxi even has a 'Vietnamese neighbor?' Why so many of us have so many Vietnamese neighbors? Ask them some time.


Im simply not as simple viewing or color blind as you are.

The cause and justification of the Korean, and Vietnam, wars was ostensibly to help a country in need, which one may consider just and fine.

The political need was not to help said country's at all but to facilitate the spread of western influence and power (not democracy, see Iraq, Afghanistan, Taiwan to name just a few for examples of this). The communists were at the same time engaged in the same activity, in other places of the world (BLOC countrys, China early on, Vietnam, Korea with Chinese help, Cuba).

So what you have is more or less the same acts going on all over the world, with roughly the same justifications, horrible acts, heroic acts, and propaganda tailored to each side's ideological system. The names and faces are different but the justification is identical on both sides. You simply cannot evaluate a conflict out of context or place and reasonably arrive at any kind of meaningful viewpoint. The whole conflict and most others between 1945-1990 are all interconnected and mired a political clash which is now being repeated, down to the same buzz words and propaganda in the media, on BOTH SIDES.

For the record I am not a communist, and am staunchly anti-authoritarian. I am a democratic socialist but even that label is a bit misleading, the entire socialist "idea" is so varied and diverse it boggles the mind how much good, and bad, can be arrived a through it. But it is an alternative meant to build upon and eventually replace (but not to DESTROY) capitalism and classic republican democracy. I personally believe in trying to get people to change their underlying way of looking around them, and at the world, than any particular political sentiment. Through a more well rounded and even viewpoint people can come to accomplish great things together, in any system, but first old molds and preconceptions and narrow mindedness needs to be shattered or at least, hopefully, cast in doubt.

[Xenephex]

Ho Chi Minh was an american admirer and based his insurrection against the French colonialists on the american war of liberation against Britain.

Were you attending 'teach-ins' during the 60's? Cause I didn't think you were that old. I believed that stuff too; I'm stunned to learn that crap is still floating around. I'm sure you can find me an 'academic' source to back it up.

Ho was a communist before WW II. You might have to dig a little further than Wikipedia to get the real story on this one, but I am familiar with the myths.

[Taxi]

Were you attending 'teach-ins' during the 60's? Cause I didn't think you were that old. I believed that stuff too; I'm stunned to learn that crap is still floating around. I'm sure you can find me an 'academic' source to back it up.

Ho was a communist before WW II. You might have to dig a little further than Wikipedia to get the real story on this one, but I am familiar with the myths.

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF VIET-NAM (SEPTEMBER 2, 1945)

https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/DeclarationOfIndependence-DRV.html

-------------

Ho Chi Minh's Speech, Ba Dinh Square, September 2, 1945



"All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

This immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. In a broader sense, this means: All the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live, to be happy and free.

The Declaration of the French Revolution made in 1791 on the Rights of Man and the citizen also states: "All men are born free and with equal rights, and must always remain free and have equal rights."

These are undeniable truths.

Nevertheless, for more than eighty years, the French imperialists, abusing the standard of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, have violated our Fatherland and oppressed our fellow citizens. They have acted contrary to the ideals of humanity and justice.

In the field of politics, they have deprived our people of every democratic liberty.

They have enforced inhuman laws; they have set up three distinct political regimes in the North, the Center, and the South of Viet-Nam in order to wreck our national unity and prevent our people from being united.

They have built more prisons than schools. They have mercilessly slain our patriots; they have drowned our uprisings in rivers of blood.

They have fettered public opinion; they have practiced obscurantism against our people.

To weaken our race they have forced us to use opium and alcohol.

In the field of economics, they have fleeced us to the backbone, impoverished our people and devastated our land.

They have robbed us of our rice fields, our mines, our forests, and our raw materials. They have monopolized the issuing of bank notes and the export trade.

They have invented numerous unjustifiable taxes and reduced our people, especially our peasantry, to a state of extreme poverty.

They have hampered the prospering of our national bourgeoisie; they have mercilessly exploited our workers.

In the autumn of 1940, when the Japanese fascists violated Indochina's territory to establish new bases in their fight against the Allies, the French imperialists went down on their bended knees and handed over our country to them.

Thus, from that date, our people were subjected to the double yoke of the French and the Japanese. Their sufferings and miseries increased. The result was that, from the end of last year to the beginning of this year, from Quang Tri Province to the North of Viet-Nam, more than two million of our fellow citizens died from starvation. On March 9 [1945], the French troops were disarmed by the Japanese. The French colonialists either fled or surrendered, showing that not only were they incapable of "protecting" us, but that, in the span of five years, they had twice sold our country to the Japanese.

On several occasions before March 9, the Viet Minh League urged the French to ally themselves with it against the Japanese. Instead of agreeing to this proposal, the French colonialists so intensified their terrorist activities against the Viet Minh members, that before fleeing they massacred a great number of our political prisoners detained at Yen Bay and Cao Bang.

Notwithstanding all this, our fellow citizens have always manifested toward the French a tolerant and humane attitude. Even after the Japanese Putsch of March, 1945, the Viet Minh League helped many Frenchmen to cross the frontier, rescued some of them from Japanese jails, and protected French lives and property.

From the autumn of 1940, our country had in fact ceased to be a French colony and had become a Japanese possession.

After the Japanese had surrendered to the Allies, our whole people rose to regain our national sovereignty and to found the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam.

The truth is that we have wrested our independence from the Japanese and not from the French.

The French have fled, the Japanese have capitulated, Emperor Bao Dai has abdicated. Our people have broken the chains which for nearly a century have fettered them and have won independence for the Fatherland. Our people at the same time have overthrown the monarchic regime that has reigned supreme for dozens of centuries. In its place has been established the present Democratic Republic.

For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government, representing the whole Vietnamese people, declare that from now on we break off all relations of a colonial character with France; we repeal all the international obligations that France has so far subscribed to on behalf of Viet-Nam, and we abolish all the special rights the French have unlawfully acquired in our Fatherland.

The whole Vietnamese people, animated by a common purpose, are determined to fight to the bitter end against any attempt by the French colonialists to reconquer their country.

We are convinced that the Allied nations, which at Teheran and San Francisco have acknowledged the principles of self-determination and equality of nations, will not refuse to acknowledge the independence of Viet-Nam.

A people who have courageously opposed French domination for more than eighty years, a people who have fought side by side with the Allies against the fascists during these last years, such a people must be free and independent.

For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, solemnly declare to the world that Viet-Nam has the right to be a free and independent country - and in fact it is so already. The entire Vietnamese people are determined to mobilize all their physical and mental strength, to sacrifice their lives and property in order to safe guard their independence and liberty.



Source: Ho Chi Minh, Selected Works (Hanoi: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1977).

[Xenephex]

By the way, you're right the that U.S. was involved in the partition of Korea, but it took two to tango, just as it did in Europe. The alternative would have been communist rule of all of Korea, just as the alternative in Europe would have been communist rule of all of Germany (for example). I'm sure that would have been ok with you, but I suspect a large number of Koreans (and Germans) would have had a problem with that arrangement.

Vietnam is a little more complicated, but the real source of the problem there, post-war, was the French insistence that they have all of their colonies returned to them, even though they had collaborated with the occupiers (the Japanese in that case).

I will concede that the U.S. violated the Geneva accords in regard to re-unification (of course they hadn't signed them), and that was not a stellar moment in our history, and our subsequent history in Vietnam (even just politically) has a lot of ugly spots. No argument.

But... what would have happened had the accords been carried out at the time? What is clear is that the majority of people in the South Vietnam of 1955 did NOT want the communists to take over (a lot of them had fled the north), and chances are that what happened in 1975 would simply have happened in 1955, with the caveat that the majority would likely have had nowhere to go and there would have been that many more executions and that much more 're-education' and imprisonment.

What actually happened in those intervening 20 years makes all of that moot, but I don't think anybody at the time anticipated all that was going to happen. Yes, we were trying to establish our 'influence' in various places around the world, but....

...what has been almost completely forgotten, or ruthlessly mocked, over the years is the fact that the communists really were out to take over the world. They made no secret of it (See Krushchev / UN ). And they were almost universally pretty bad guys. With the possible exception of Yugoslavia, virtually every communist government in the history of the world has ended up being incredibly oppressive and ruthlessly violent towards any opposition. The Che's and the Trotsky's (the 'true believers') end up dead and the Stalins and the Maos end up in charge, and it ain't pleasant for whatever countries they ended up owning. Read the history of communism FROM the BEGINNING please, before you want to discount that threat.

So, in 1955, it is not unreasonable to make a case that we were at least trying to do the right thing - not just for us but for our allies and other peoples of the world - by opposing communist expansion. You can argue the results - you can argue the tactics and methods and I would end up conceding points in that discussion.

But you can't take this incredibly simplistic view of world history since WW II as some vast American plot to line our pockets and expect anyone with half a brain to take you seriously. We got from Korea... what was it again? We got from Vietnam... forgot that one too. If we were the bad guys - who were the good guys?

It's never that simple.

[Xenephex]

Taxi,

I never said Ho was a fool. But he was still a communist before World War II.

[Taxi]

So you completely ignored my posting of the vietnamese declaration of independence after saying that this "crap" was still floating around and that lol, please find me an "academic" source to back that up. Good job.

Im done for the night, dishonest interlocutor.

[Desert]

Alawen, I think you're wrong in that you assume those who aren't die hard flag wavers like yourself have given up on America.

Quite the contrary, I get the idea that people feel America has given up on Them. Nowadays, corporations are more important than human rights, Rogue nations that we are Allied with continue to tempt and threaten OUR peaceful existence by THEIR provocative actions towards their neighbors (israel was bad policy long before GW and 9/11). Do our votes even count anymore? How can you say that We have given up on America when it is so clear that, while America may not have given up on us, it's definitely forgotten.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."
Unfortunately for all of your hard work, founding fathers, our past few generations have turned us into a society that has lost our backbone. The only way out of this mess is by revolution (of varying degrees), BUT we're so complacent and brainwashed into believing ANY attack on america is an act of terrorism, even if said act would better our country as a whole by cleansing our wounds of dead and decaying matter.

That said, going back to my opening sentence, i personally haven't given up on America itself, only the Americans that live there. George Orwell had it wrong... Huxley is a prophet.

[Taxi]

17 minutes of footage that will prove that martial law is a real threat, at least in Canada but that is also the legal atmosphere in the western world in general where more and more democratic rights are being trampled and trivialized, notably in the UK and italy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kZwps4CPwc&feature=player_embedded

[ShadowWulf]

Xenephex: Re-read my post, in no way did i play down communism as a threat towards what most would consider freedom, however what i did point out and you ignored is the fact that the so called "free nations" do the same exact things as the communists, just in a more acceptable, publicly friendly, and in some cases invisible manner.

In our own way were just as bad as the communists nations of yore, better in some ways, worse in others. My point isn't to harp on the known transgressions of communism but to instead point out the same acts under a different guise perpetrated by the US and other nations, but which are far FAR to easy to conceal, hide and re direct attention from in the modern world. And unfortunatly most government expansion in the 20th century has, like it or not, been driven by money, power and the desire to expand. The western world knows this, because without it a huge portion of our domestic spending would wither and die.

US, China, UK, soviet Russia were all the same just the mechanisms are a little different. I seek a new way apart from these. New ideas are needed or else well just keep rehashing the same shit every 10-20 years and giving it a new label (like the English, the Spanish, The Mexican Army, Red Menace then Terrorism for the same lines re used)

Also as of yet nobody has bothered to define this "Liberty" theyre speaking of, such a simple thing might actually help people see eye to eye since i do NOT believe people see or understand it the same wey. Often its the most common place and "universal" words that are up to so much misinterpretation by various points of view. Just a thought...

TAXI: You read anything off of Z-Net? You might like it, or not, but the articles are fascinating though some should be taken with a grain of salt. Several articles on the G20 as well just got posted. http://www.zcommunications.org/journalist-attacked-at-toronto-g20-by-jesse-freeston

[Gorgetrapper]

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/penises.png

[ShadowWulf]

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/penises.png

Yep, seen that one, funny also/ Though I have yet to see many penis's pop out in this thread (OH GAWD NO DONT!).
Only reason im still here is thuis far the discussion has be relatively mild, no huge fag lines, and the topic's are stimulating and good reading id imagine no matter what side your on.

[astarothel]

I have yet to see many penis's pop out in this thread (OH GAWD NO DONT!).


That just reminded me. I havent read Warren Ellis' blog in like a year. I should get on that shit.

[Taxi]

Another good 8 minutes of footage from the real news network about the g-20 events last week in Toronto:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu5o5891JS8

[Taxi]

TAXI: You read anything off of Z-Net? You might like it, or not, but the articles are fascinating though some should be taken with a grain of salt. Several articles on the G20 as well just got posted. http://www.zcommunications.org/journalist-attacked-at-toronto-g20-by-jesse-freeston

Yep been a reader since 1998

This is a website similar to Z-net, if you dont know about it:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/

The articles are usually solid. I say usually because the article on top at the moment actually isnt. It draws some hasty conclusions about people being provocateurs, not enough evidence to warrant that article for sure. But articles like "The Global Political Awakening and the New World Order" are really interesting and well researched.

[Hasbinbad]

It's nice that you live in a country where you get to have opinions like that and vocalize them in public, isn't it?
Don't kid yourself. You can do that in most other countries in the world too. America is not special. Furthermore, the American military hasn't done ANYTHING towards THOSE ENDS since we BEGRUDGINGLY fought in ww2. The VAST majority of the TOTAL funds applied to the US military has gone towards doomsday bombs / deployment, and killing civillians in foreign countries for the protection of monetary interests.

Here's a 2010 pay chart (http://www.navycs.com/2010-military-pay-chart.html). Obama just made the GI bill not completely suck again recently, so that compensation is worthwhile again. VA hospitals are still awful.
You don't have to tell me about how the benefits are not that great. Ask me why I didn't join. Also, ask me what it's like trying to get my brain-damaged brother admitted to the VA hospital near me.

Now tell me how much I'd have to pay you to put your life on the line.
There is a number, but the US Military isn't willing to pay it. Blackwater.. That's probably another story. However, this is a very shaky argument because of the above debunking of the motives of the US Military, which have nothing to do with "putting your life on the line to protect the state." That is such a laughable premise that I am actually quite surprised you would even begin to stoop to it. It is patently false, and I defy you to support it with ANY form of evidence.

The fact is that YOU TOOK A JOB. You were offered a pay scale and a benefits package, and you TOOK IT. That was a decision on your part. Whether or not you were deluded into thinking that CHOICE was somehow patriotic or not is completely beside the point.

Edit: Blaine just reminded me that we got taxed on our housing and all our benefits and those are valued way above market so we'd end up with a few hundred bucks a month. The only way you make much is if you're deployed to a war zone.
See above. You were offered a job, you did a (probably quick and deluded) estimate, and you signed the contract. Whine somewhere else.

You are not a patriot just because you were brainwashed and are deluded, no matter how many flags you wave or how many bullets you've taken while killing brown children.

[Xenephex]

So you completely ignored my posting of the vietnamese declaration of independence after saying that this "crap" was still floating around and that lol, please find me an "academic" source to back that up. Good job.

Im done for the night, dishonest interlocutor.
No, I didn't completely ignore you. You just lack any touch of subtlety. I've read the speech before (probably before you were born); I don't deny it's authenticity.

The 'crap' I was referring to was the interpretation of that document which you apparently accept. Said interpretation being that Ho was a great admirer of American democracy and wanted to form a government allied with the western powers after the end of the war until he was rejected and only then turned to the communists (that's pretty much precisely what we all believed in the 60's). It's hard to believe that interpretation still has any currency, what with Wikipedia and all.

It was a great speech, but it was not primarily directed towards the Vietnamese people; it was directed towards the western powers, and in particular the U.S., in hopes that they would a) grant Vietnam its independence and b) recognize Ho's Viet Minh as the legitimate government.

This was less than a month after the end of the war; there were still Japanese troops in Vietnam. There would shortly be British, French and Chinese troops in Vietnam and things were about to get complicated, but at that moment they were just confused. Ho seized the opportunity to declare his party the legitimate government of Vietnam and issue his declaration. He was well aware of what was happening half way around the world - that the Western powers, plus Russia, were in the process of deciding the face of the post-war world. It was a nice speech and it was a political ploy.

I remain disappointed that we (not meaning just the U.S. but the western powers in concert) gave Vietnam back to the French after the war (of course I am somewhat disappointed that we gave FRANCE back to the French after the war); there was considerable sentiment among many in power in the U.S. to grant Vietnam its independence. But the perception at the time was that we 'needed' France in post-war Europe, since they were the biggest country on the continent (outside the emerging communist bloc) that had not been an axis power during the war.

France had dictated the terms at Versailles after WW I (against U.S. objections) and had in the process almost guaranteed an eventual WW II. This time we had a different plan and we, for reasons I still don't comprehend, thought we needed the French and thus the French immediately became a major speaker in brokering all the crap that followed. We got the Western Europe we wanted (which didn't turn out too badly for them - compare and contrast Eastern Europe), and France got back its colonies, including Indochina. And France continued and continues to do exactly what France wants. They have never been anyone we could rely on, then or now.

So we should have granted Vietnam its independence, but we were never going to hand the country over to Ho. There were a lot of political factions in Vietnam - Catholics, Buddhists, and various non-religious factions that were not communist. The advantage that the communists had was that they were unified (well, after Ho killed off the opposition) and organized. But they NEVER represented anything close to a majority of the population.

You could look some of this stuff up yourself if you would go somewhere besides your radical websites (Wikipedia actually does at least a reasonable job on most of it). Suffice it to say, that the history of post-war Vietnam is complex and I'm tired of typing.

Bottom line: Nice speech which was a calculated political maneuver. i.e. Ho was not a fool. And, Ho was still a communist long before World War II. I covered it in my initial response. I just thought you knew a little more than you did.

[ShadowWulf]

I dunno, i think General Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette made all the difference in the end...

So we should have granted Vietnam its independence, but we were never going to hand the country over to Ho. There were a lot of political factions in Vietnam - Catholics, Buddhists, and various non-religious factions that were not communist. The advantage that the communists had was that they were unified (well, after Ho killed off the opposition) and organized. But they NEVER represented anything close to a majority of the population.

And as I said before it all comes down to political wheeling and dealing. We could of, should of, but didnt does not cut it im sorry. For that matter im not sure what you're trying to defend here. I am aware of the complexities of post WW2 Vietnam however nothing you said again addresses with any of my points made earlier, though in some way it seems to reinforce them. Both the eastern and western forces were guilty of plying favor in the region and attempting to expand its regional base of power. We sought to maintain close ties with France and hence acquiesced to their bid for the region while Ho and the communists he worked with from outside the country sought to do the same in their way.

The people were mostly not communist, you are correct in this, but what does it matter? You could also say they were hardly democratic for that matter if you had wished. In the end the people were caught in the middle, and crushed, by both "Liberating" and "Freedom loving" sides.

[Daywolf]

What IS liberty? I am rather interested in your definition.Liberty is what they have in Iraq, but we don’t have here… or little of. Liberty is, for instance, the ability to bear arms at any time and any place, loaded, so to defend ones friends, family and neighbors. In Iraq they can pretty much carry full-auto assault most anyplace they go. In the US you are lucky to have a semi-auto from before the ban, and locked up. In Canada… lol like 4% have a handgun.

Liberty is basically, in this case, having the ability to meet your obligation to others, by your own free will and choosing, by whatever means to whatever ends. Personal firearms is something that needs to be removed before a government can take all freedoms away from the people when it wills to; but it is government which should not be free. Yes liberty is much more, but this answer is specific to my post that you were replying to. For the broader understanding of our Liberty in the US, one needs to read the US Constitution… w/o special interpretation but literal. The founders had it right, as well as could be governed by man at least.

[Taxi]

Liberty is what they have in Iraq, but we don’t have here… or little of. Liberty is, for instance, the ability to bear arms at any time and any place, loaded, so to defend ones friends, family and neighbors. In Iraq they can pretty much carry full-auto assault most anyplace they go. In the US you are lucky to have a semi-auto from before the ban, and locked up. In Canada… lol like 4% have a handgun.

Liberty is basically, in this case, having the ability to meet your obligation to others, by your own free will and choosing, by whatever means to whatever ends. Personal firearms is something that needs to be removed before a government can take all freedoms away from the people when it wills to; but it is government which should not be free. Yes liberty is much more, but this answer is specific to my post that you were replying to. For the broader understanding of our Liberty in the US, one needs to read the US Constitution… w/o special interpretation but literal. The founders had it right, as well as could be governed by man at least.

Im still struggling with this issue. I used to be a staunch supporter of weapon bans of any kind, until i was attacked 3 times in 6 months in the subway. Now i carry a knife. I differ in that from most people from the left i guess.

But that leaves also other areas with big question marks. Like people showing up with automatic rifles at rallies of the kind i join sometimes in Canada, just to intimidate people. Columbine doesnt happen often in Canada because its alot harder to get access to these kinds of weapons. So im still struggling about where i stand on this issue.

Liberty is also for me freedom of association and freedom of speech, freedom of movement which we are seeing being repressed in lots of western countries at this point in time. All the simple things that are in the american constitution, canadian charter of rights and freedoms, UN declaration of human rights, thats liberty to me. Its more than that, but those are the basics.

[astarothel]

Guns: they're pretty much like penises. Their only use is for fucking people.

[Daywolf]

What IS liberty? I am rather interested in your definition.

Im still struggling with this issue. I used to be a staunch supporter of weapon bans of any kind, until i was attacked 3 times in 6 months in the subway. Now i carry a knife. I differ in that from most people from the left i guess.

But that leaves also other areas with big question marks. Like people showing up with automatic rifles at rallies of the kind i join sometimes in Canada, just to intimidate people. Columbine doesnt happen often in Canada because its alot harder to get access to these kinds of weapons. So im still struggling about where i stand on this issue.

Liberty is also for me freedom of association and freedom of speech, freedom of movement which we are seeing being repressed in lots of western countries at this point in time. All the simple things that are in the american constitution, canadian charter of rights and freedoms, UN declaration of human rights, thats liberty to me. Its more than that, but those are the basics.

I wouldn't say it's a left or right issue regarding gun ownership. I'm not sure why it would matter.

But to put it in general about liberty, it is the conduit to freedom. So like a sailor has the freedom to go ashore and get himself a prostitute, but only at liberty of doing so. There may be freedoms, but limited liberty to exercise those freedoms... to a point of making it not free any longer.

And yes, I have been assaulted a number of times, I grew up in LA. I think that when we live a sheltered existence, we disassociate ourselves with reality; to what is really going on in the world around us. It should effect us when others come to harm, especially if they could have prevented it. Cops cant be there for us at all times, but I can be there for my neighbor, and have.

[ShadowWulf]

I'm posting from my phone so ill be very brief. I find it fascinating how ones definition is singularly focused on one issue, yet some would define liberty as persuing happiness and success, with or without a weapon, yet not hinge their definition on the ability or carry a full auto assault rifle since outside all but the most utterly extreme of circumstances such a weapon acts as a method of life and liberty denier to another.

For the record I own weapons and have posted myself at the range in another thread here. However in no way do they define me or guide my acts in persuit of freedom.

[Alawen Everywhere]

Don't kid yourself. You can do that in most other countries in the world too. America is not special. Furthermore, the American military hasn't done ANYTHING towards THOSE ENDS since we BEGRUDGINGLY fought in ww2. The VAST majority of the TOTAL funds applied to the US military has gone towards doomsday bombs / deployment, and killing civillians in foreign countries for the protection of monetary interests.


You don't have to tell me about how the benefits are not that great. Ask me why I didn't join. Also, ask me what it's like trying to get my brain-damaged brother admitted to the VA hospital near me.


There is a number, but the US Military isn't willing to pay it. Blackwater.. That's probably another story. However, this is a very shaky argument because of the above debunking of the motives of the US Military, which have nothing to do with "putting your life on the line to protect the state." That is such a laughable premise that I am actually quite surprised you would even begin to stoop to it. It is patently false, and I defy you to support it with ANY form of evidence.

The fact is that YOU TOOK A JOB. You were offered a pay scale and a benefits package, and you TOOK IT. That was a decision on your part. Whether or not you were deluded into thinking that CHOICE was somehow patriotic or not is completely beside the point.


See above. You were offered a job, you did a (probably quick and deluded) estimate, and you signed the contract. Whine somewhere else.

You are not a patriot just because you were brainwashed and are deluded, no matter how many flags you wave or how many bullets you've taken while killing brown children.

You're wrong and it is patently absurd for you to tell me what I did and why. Like my father before me and like his father before him, I served my country before I began my career. I would have made more money working at McDonald's.

I am not whining about anything. I love my country and I would serve again if called upon. I am not a mercenary; I am not a whore. One of us seems to think about everything in terms of dollars; I do not.

Your argument style is extremely offensive, insulting and unattractive. In one short post you have managed to suggest that I am not only a whore but a cheap whore, that I am brainwashed, that I am deluded, and that I am a murderer. All this because you do not agree with me that America's problems can be solved and that it is up to us, the American people, to help solve them. I suggest you read your own words carefully and reflect on what they say about you.

[Taxi]

I wouldn't say it's a left or right issue regarding gun ownership. I'm not sure why it would matter.


Because alot of people on the left regard NRA type people as gun nuts, and alot are, like the guy who shot a 16 year old exchange student on halloween because she stepped on his property.

But again as i said, im conflicted because i tend to agree with people like you who make a case that people have a right to defend themselves on principle, but i do have alot of reservations.

[Taxi]

This is part of why i agree with people like daywolf on self-defense issues:

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/5411/bangladeshipolicemanh00.jpg

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8742/abangladeshipolicemank0.jpg

Garment workers protests in Bengladesh this week

[astarothel]

My stance on firearms:

A semi-automatic weapon, or weapons with semi-automatic capabilities (especially rifles) or better are not civilian weapons. Play with them at a range all you want, but I don't think I want these belong anywhere in a residence.

Weapons registration is a no brainer. I don't care how inconvenient it is, the excuse that criminals don't have to register their guns doesn't float with me. law enforcement officials should be able to pull up that sort of thing. If Jimbo is involved in a domestic disturbance with his wife, if I were the police I think I'd like to know if he has any registered firearms ahead of time.

The screening process and background check on firearms needs to be improved dramatically, especially for concealable firearms. I don't care if it takes an extra month, the current process needs to be improved in both Canada and the US. I do not feel that there are many cases where firearm is needed as quickly as they are available. Self-defense in the event a person feels threatened isn't a great reason in and of itself. The reason I say this is that a person getting a firearm for self defense won't have the training and judgment required to use it properly. This ties in to my next point.

Everyone that owns a gun thinks they know how to use it well or properly.
A large number of these people are wrong. The firearms safety course should be 1) mandatory in all states, and 2) more extensive. Retakes on the safety course should be required (maybe not yearly but every so often) for renewing your license. Wish I could find the clip from tv I saw a while ago (from 60 Minutes I think) that proved this. I will look for it later.

[astarothel]

I am not a massive Real News Network Fan.
I am however a massive Steve Paikin fan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCWNqMV4Bgs&feature=player_embedded

[ShadowWulf]

For self defense:

In no first world country (or most others for that matter) which allows guns is the right to use them in self defense intended to apply to the government, no matter how severe the mistreatment. Those are the simple (and proven) facts on the matter. Even if the cops in the picture above had been shot by a concerned citizen, i guarantee you in this and that society the shooter would be dead.

If the goverment came to take your guns, illegally or not, and you shot first you are in the wrong under modern day laws. Period. Its the corner youre driven into.

The only use people who claim they are self defense weapons against a government is for violent, armed overthrow, not defense.

[Taxi]

For self defense:

In no first world country (or most others for that matter) which allows guns is the right to use them in self defense intended to apply to the government, no matter how severe the mistreatment. Those are the simple (and proven) facts on the matter. Even if the cops in the picture above had been shot by a concerned citizen, i guarantee you in this and that society the shooter would be dead.

If the goverment came to take your guns, illegally or not, and you shot first you are in the wrong under modern day laws. Period. Its the corner youre driven into.

The only use people who claim they are self defense weapons against a government is for violent, armed overthrow, not defense.

That depends what kind you repression you are facing. If that was my kid getting his ass beat down by a thug in armor, id be thinking about it. If i was an iraqi who lost all my family to american shock and awe, id be doing it.

And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo probably would have wished to have a firearm to at least take some of them cops down with him.

[Daywolf]

I'm posting from my phone so ill be very brief. I find it fascinating how ones definition is singularly focused on one issue, yet some would define liberty as persuing happiness and success, with or without a weapon, yet not hinge their definition on the ability or carry a full auto assault rifle since outside all but the most utterly extreme of circumstances such a weapon acts as a method of life and liberty denier to another.


I'm not sure how that applies. I don't have the time to write up every application of liberty. I even wrote more than you did... one along the same lines to what you were replying to (my post about gun rights etc), and another in general terms.

As for liberty and happiness, they have different meanings. I assume you are referring to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Happiness is not guaranteed, can't leave out the pursuit part. If all the same word, they would have just used one. "Success" is not a part of the founding documents. What happiness is is self-determined, or should be.

Weapons do not act as anything, people do. I'm all for open concealment, it gives the "people do" second thoughts about violating someones rights or life. But first goes liberty and then goes rights, lastly you have a government trying to take care of you of which it is incapable of doing but only harming you if anything. I live near the southern border, so full-auto would be fine by me; maybe not needed today but shit happens eventually. I should have access to that if I wish, it's a constitutional right but with no liberty any longer. Yet someone in LA can get one illegally, but law abiding citizens cant. It's cockeyed.

[Daywolf]

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8742/abangladeshipolicemank0.jpg

Garment workers protests in Bengladesh this week
Government should fear the people. It's when they don't this becomes the norm at some point. It also works for people fearing the people, as who really sets out to potentially get killed for little to nothing? The greater the risk, the less of it happening. Sort of like MAD, blowing up the world is probably not the best course of action etc. The hidden danger is even more of a deterrent, because you don't know who is packing heat, find oneself outgunned by 20 random people lol

And even in the case of riot police, one would expect them to then behave. But too the protesters would possibly behave in the first place as non-protesters can settle matters as well, if need be. Even in California, it only went so far with the LA riots, as most of us had our scanners on and fresh ammo just in case it spilled over. But they wound up burning their own neighborhoods down... heh then wondering why business decided to not come back. LA just sucks, let it burn.

[Excision Rottun]

http://www.fohguild.org/forums/attachments/screenshots/144382d1277967718-funny-strange-random-pics-1277961694585.png

[Shannacore]

Hahahah

[2pair]

http://www.jedreport.com/pics/theonion.png

http://blogs.gnome.org/muelli/files/2009/06/america.gif

http://emergent-culture.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/killing-hope-william-blum-cia-covert-ops.jpg

US vetoes on UN resolutions:

1972-2002 Vetoes from the USA
---
Year -----Resolution Vetoed by the USA
1972 Condemns Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids.
1973 Afirms the rights of the Palestinians and calls on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.
1976 Condemns Israel for attacking Lebanese civilians.
1976 Condemns Israel for building settlements in the occupied territories.
1976 Calls for self determination for the Palestinians.
1976 Afirms the rights of the Palestinians.
1978 Urges the permanent members (USA, USSR, UK, France, China) to insure United Nations decisions on the maintenance of international peace and security.
1978 Criticises the living conditions of the Palestinians.
1978 Condemns the Israeli human rights record in occupied territories.
1978 Calls for developed countries to increase the quantity and quality of development assistance to underdeveloped countries.
1979 Calls for an end to all military and nuclear collaboration with the apartheid South Africa.
1979 Strengthens the arms embargo against South Africa.
1979 Offers assistance to all the oppressed people of South Africa and their liberation movement.
1979 Concerns negotiations on disarmament and cessation of the nuclear arms race.
1979 Calls for the return of all inhabitants expelled by Israel.
1979 Demands that Israel desist from human rights violations.
1979 Requests a report on the living conditions of Palestinians in occupied Arab countries.
1979 Offers assistance to the Palestinian people.
1979 Discusses sovereignty over national resources in occupied Arab territories.
1979 Calls for protection of developing counties' exports.
1979 Calls for alternative approaches within the United Nations system for improving the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
1979 Opposes support for intervention in the internal or external affairs of states.
1979 For a United Nations Conference on Women.
1979 To include Palestinian women in the United Nations Conference on Women.
1979 Safeguards rights of developing countries in multinational trade negotiations.
1980 Requests Israel to return displaced persons.
1980 Condemns Israeli policy regarding the living conditions of the Palestinian people.
1980 Condemns Israeli human rights practices in occupied territories. 3 resolutions.
1980 Afirms the right of self determination for the Palestinians.
1980 Offers assistance to the oppressed people of South Africa and their national liberation movement.
1980 Attempts to establish a New International Economic Order to promote the growth of underdeveloped countries and international economic co-operation.
1980 Endorses the Program of Action for Second Half of United Nations Decade for Women.
1980 Declaration of non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.
1980 Emphasises that the development of nations and individuals is a human right.
1980 Calls for the cessation of all nuclear test explosions.
1980 Calls for the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.
1981 Promotes co-operative movements in developing countries.
1981 Affirms the right of every state to choose its economic and social system in accord with the will of its people, without outside interference in whatever form it takes.
1981 Condemns activities of foreign economic interests in colonial territories.
1981 Calls for the cessation of all test explosions of nuclear weapons.
1981 Calls for action in support of measures to prevent nuclear war, curb the arms race and promote disarmament.
1981 Urges negotiations on prohibition of chemical and biological weapons.
1981 Declares that education, work, health care, proper nourishment, national development, etc are human rights.
1981 Condemns South Africa for attacks on neighbouring states, condemns apartheid and attempts to strengthen sanctions. 7 resolutions.
1981 Condemns an attempted coup by South Africa on the Seychelles.
1981 Condemns Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, human rights policies, and the bombing of Iraq. 18 resolutions.
1982 Condemns the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. 6 resolutions (1982 to 1983).
1982 Condemns the shooting of 11 Muslims at a shrine in Jerusalem by an Israeli soldier.
1982 Calls on Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights occupied in 1967.
1982 Condemns apartheid and calls for the cessation of economic aid to South Africa. 4 resolutions.
1982 Calls for the setting up of a World Charter for the protection of the ecology.
1982 Sets up a United Nations conference on succession of states in respect to state property, archives and debts.
1982 Nuclear test bans and negotiations and nuclear free outer space. 3 resolutions.
1982 Supports a new world information and communications order.
1982 Prohibition of chemical and bacteriological weapons.
1982 Development of international law.
1982 Protects against products harmful to health and the environment .
1982 Declares that education, work, health care, proper nourishment, national development are human rights.
1982 Protects against products harmful to health and the environment.
1982 Development of the energy resources of developing countries.
1983 Resolutions about apartheid, nuclear arms, economics, and international law. 15 resolutions.
1984 Condemns support of South Africa in its Namibian and other policies.
1984 International action to eliminate apartheid.
1984 Condemns Israel for occupying and attacking southern Lebanon.
1984 Resolutions about apartheid, nuclear arms, economics, and international law. 18 resolutions.
1985 Condemns Israel for occupying and attacking southern Lebanon.
1985 Condemns Israel for using excessive force in the occupied territories.
1985 Resolutions about cooperation, human rights, trade and development. 3 resolutions.
1985 Measures to be taken against Nazi, Fascist and neo-Fascist activities .
1986 Calls on all governments (including the USA) to observe international law.
1986 Imposes economic and military sanctions against South Africa.
1986 Condemns Israel for its actions against Lebanese civilians.
1986 Calls on Israel to respect Muslim holy places.
1986 Condemns Israel for sky-jacking a Libyan airliner.
1986 Resolutions about cooperation, security, human rights, trade, media bias, the environment and development.
8 resolutions.
1987 Calls on Israel to abide by the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of the Palestinians.
1987 Calls on Israel to stop deporting Palestinians.
1987 Condemns Israel for its actions in Lebanon. 2 resolutions.
1987 Calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon.
1987 Cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States.
1987 Calls for compliance in the International Court of Justice concerning military and paramilitary activities against Nicaragua and a call to end the trade embargo against Nicaragua. 2 resolutions.
1987 Measures to prevent international terrorism, study the underlying political and economic causes of terrorism, convene a conference to define terrorism and to differentiate it from the struggle of people from national liberation.
1987 Resolutions concerning journalism, international debt and trade. 3 resolutions.
1987 Opposition to the build up of weapons in space.
1987 Opposition to the development of new weapons of mass destruction.
1987 Opposition to nuclear testing. 2 resolutions.
1987 Proposal to set up South Atlantic "Zone of Peace".
1988 Condemns Israeli practices against Palestinians in the occupied territories. 5 resolutions (1988 and 1989).
1989 Condemns USA invasion of Panama.
1989 Condemns USA troops for ransacking the residence of the Nicaraguan ambassador in Panama.
1989 Condemns USA support for the Contra army in Nicaragua.
1989 Condemns illegal USA embargo of Nicaragua.
1989 Opposing the acquisition of territory by force.
1989 Calling for a resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict based on earlier UN resoltions.
1990 To send three UN Security Council observers to the occupied territories.
1995 Afirms that land in East Jerusalem annexed by Israel is occupied territory.
1997 Calls on Israel to cease building settlements in East Jerusalem and other occupied territories. 2 resolutions.
1999 Calls on the USA to end its trade embargo on Cuba. 8 resolutions (1992 to 1999).
2001 To send unarmed monitors to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
2001 To set up the International Criminal Court.
2002 To renew the peace keeping mission in Bosnia.

2010 To tell the rest of the world to not fuck itself because America isn't the greatest country in the world.


Oh yeah, and you are aware the onion is a fake newspaper that reports fake news--- right?

[Vanech]

I only managed to read through four or five pages of posts before I gave up and decided to reply.

I am American born. 3rd generation American on my father's side, and 2nd generation American on my mothers side.

All of my immediate (not dead, male) family has served in the military for the U.S. of A.

My Grandfather and Uncle were in the Navy (grandfather was a Sea-Bee) father was army, my other uncle was Air force.

I have the utmost respect for my country and the men and women who have sworn their lives to protect our way of life... (the standing military.)

..but I absolutely $!@#$&# hate our government.

America is not a Democracy, it is a Capitalist Dictatorship. We have the false idea of choice thrown in our face every election year, but we're only ever voting for two sides of the same freakin' coin.

I could go on and on and on about this for days, but the majority of what I have to say isn't 'precisely related' to the thread so I'll leave it at this -

Fuck us. The world is better off without us meddling in every little #$@ @#$@ed thing. If anything we should be reduced to a second or third world country just so we are forced to stop sticking our fingers into the collective pie, thus ruining it for everyone else.

[Nedala]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWiBt-pqp0E

America should listen to this man he speaks the truth ;)

[Excision Rottun]

I only managed to read through four or five pages of posts before I gave up and decided to reply.

I am American born. 3rd generation American on my father's side, and 2nd generation American on my mothers side.

All of my immediate (not dead, male) family has served in the military for the U.S. of A.

My Grandfather and Uncle were in the Navy (grandfather was a Sea-Bee) father was army, my other uncle was Air force.

I have the utmost respect for my country and the men and women who have sworn their lives to protect our way of life... (the standing military.)

..but I absolutely $!@#$&# hate our government.

America is not a Democracy, it is a Capitalist Dictatorship. We have the false idea of choice thrown in our face every election year, but we're only ever voting for two sides of the same freakin' coin.

I could go on and on and on about this for days, but the majority of what I have to say isn't 'precisely related' to the thread so I'll leave it at this -

Fuck us. The world is better off without us meddling in every little #$@ @#$@ed thing. If anything we should be reduced to a second or third world country just so we are forced to stop sticking our fingers into the collective pie, thus ruining it for everyone else.

Sir, I like the cut of your jib.

[blizzil]

As a Proud, Long Term, Liberal Activist, I will continue to do as I've always done.


I will continue to OPPOSE:
*Increasing the Power and Wealth of For Profit Corporations.

*Increasing Military Spending (Decrease by 50% immediately)

*Continuing the phony WAR in the Middle East (Out Now)

*A Free Pass for War Criminals and Torturers

*The Privatization of our Common Wealth and Common Responsibilities, including Social Programs

*The use of the "Secrecy" classification to avoid civilian oversight


I will continue to SUPPORT:
*Medicare for anyone who wants it

*The immediate break-up (Trust Busting) of everything "Too Big to Fail".

*Fair Competition Legislation that lets Mom&Pop (small locally owned businesses and farms) compete with Big Box and Factory Farms on a level playing field.

*An end to "Free Trade" (Race to the Bottom)

*Organized LABOR and local co-ops.

*An end to the two-tiered Judicial System

*Prosecution of rich American War Criminals and War Profiteers. (Oh yes they did!)

*An END to "Corporate Personhood"

*Strictly Enforced Publicly Financed Elections (severe penalties for criminals)

*Transparent and Verifiable elections (Why isn't this a front burner issue with the Democratic Party?)

*Re-Regulation with strict oversight of Banking/Investment, Transportation, Communications, Trade, Energy, Utilities, and Insurance.

*NO Public Money for private Prisons, armed Private Police, armed Defense Contractors, private intelligence agencies, or For Profit Health Insurance Corporations.

*Immediate Civil Rights and Equal Protection for ALL. (No Exceptions)

*Free Quality Universal Education to everyone who wants it.

*Strong Social Safety Net and Consumer Protections.

*An end to The Patriot Act and a return to The Constitution.(especially Habeas and privacy protections)

*A refutation of the "Unitary Executive", and legislation to ensure it NEVER happens again.

*An END to Republican/Corporate influence INSIDE The Democratic Party !
(NO! They DON"T deserve a seat at the table!)

These are values I strongly believe in. I have fought for these values long before I ever heard the name "Obama", "triangulation", or "Centrist" Democrats. I will keep fighting for these values no matter who is in the White House.

It is an "Issues" thing, not a matter of Political Personalities.
When politicians move toward the above, I will support them.
When they move away, I will oppose them.

I have been deeply disappointed over the last year as the White House has made concession after concession to Republicans, but when the Progressive Democrats held out for the Public Option, or opposed increased WAR funding, or offered up a Pro-LABOR challenger to an entrenched Anti-LABOR Senator, The White House sent the Winged Monkeys after them....Chicago Style.
I have seen no such effort to bend Centrist" Democrats or Republicans to his will during the first 1 -1/2 years of the "CHANGE" administration.

I don't expect to get everything, but I DO expect respect for these values, and a voice in the Party that is asking for my money and support.
If a Political Party does not at least acknowledge these values and give them a seat at the table,
I will find another Party that will.
If these values are no longer welcome in the d party, so be it.
If Standing Up for these issues and pointing out when the Democratic Party falls short is seen as an attack on the President...so be it.

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.--FDR

FDR's Economic Bill of Rights

THIS is the Democratic Party I joined
THIS is the Democratic Party I love.

I find that my FDR/LBJ Democratic values are increasingly unwelcome in the Democratic Party, and has been construed as "not supporting the President" by some.
I disagree.
The very best thing I can do to support the Democratic Party and President Obama is to point out where the Party and our Leadership have drifted away from these values, and to call out for a return to the Working Class values that the Democratic Party once embraced.


The govt is what we make it. If you dont like it, vote and change it.


"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[Qaedain]

I promised myself that I wouldn't get involved in this thread, but I was wondering if you could elaborate on these topics? I have no opinion, really, just wondering how you might go about it.

*The immediate break-up (Trust Busting) of everything "Too Big to Fail".

*Fair Competition Legislation that lets Mom&Pop (small locally owned businesses and farms) compete with Big Box and Factory Farms on a level playing field.

[blizzil]

Could be done a few different ways, mostly through strong regulation via govt bodies (whove been systematically defunded since 1980)

Teddy Roosevelt did it, we can do it today.

[blizzil]

unfettered, corporate abuse is the single greatest threat to our republic.

They simply have to much power. Corporations tried to take over the country in the 1940s and failed, well - in the turn of the new century, they took it over successfully without a shot fired.

[Qaedain]

Could be done a few different ways, mostly through strong regulation via govt bodies (whove been systematically defunded since 1980)

Teddy Roosevelt did it, we can do it today.

What I mean is, how do you propose big boxes could be regulated so mom'n'pops could compete on price? Price floors/ceilings? Supply restrictions?

[blizzil]

They need zoning permits to open up supercenters (wal-marts) you deny them. You Tax imports! (F'free trade) Its all Wal-mart sells anyways.

Give the smaller mom'pops tax incentives.

It all can be done locally, which it has in some communities

[Daywolf]

Could be done a few different ways, mostly through strong regulation via govt bodies (whove been systematically defunded since 1980)

Teddy Roosevelt did it, we can do it today.Not all corps are ebil. It’s just a small percentage that consider themselves international with no strings attached to any particular country or to foreign countries or entities(e.g. British Petroleum). Regulation within the US geared towards restricting corporate business usually effects the smaller and/or domestic company (mom-n-pop’s) rather than any real threats. Anytime you make a decision to empower government to regulate anything, it usually results in the little guy getting hurt, even yourself in one way or another. Remember what Reagan said "Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem". And I think it is even more so true today than it was then, as now politicians are pretty much indentured to special interest pockets. Time to throw all the bums out!

Btw fdr can shove it. “Liberal activism” has only led to larger and larger government (from both parties), while if it had gotten smaller as the founding fathers intended, we would not be in such a mess as we are. Your big lists of government programs is appalling, government owes you nothing other than being massively downsized so the people can better control it once again as it was intended to be.

[Overcast]

That depends what kind you repression you are facing. If that was my kid getting his ass beat down by a thug in armor, id be thinking about it. If i was an iraqi who lost all my family to american shock and awe, id be doing it.

And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo probably would have wished to have a firearm to at least take some of them cops down with him.

Statistically..

In whose hands have guns taken more lives?

In the hands of law-abiding citizens.
In the hands of Criminals.
Or In the Hands of Governments.

I suspect the third is true.

So - statistically, who should be disarmed first?

[Daywolf]

Statistically..

In whose hands have guns taken more lives?

In the hands of law-abiding citizens.
In the hands of Criminals.
Or In the Hands of Governments.

I suspect the third is true.

So - statistically, who should be disarmed first?

Well at least domestically that is how it is; we have the national guard for domestic threats not the military. Disarming the military goes against the constitution. Disarming civilians goes against the constitution as well. But who observes the constitution any longer? It’s only been used as reach-round over the past decade for the most part.

Thugs can always get guns, bombs and knives; no regulation has ever changed that other than to punish the law-abiding citizen. But yes, it’s not the citizen that is the threat… but only a threat to a dictatorial government, or one trying to become such. In the end it’s not our duty to nation-build the world, nor to police it with our military, but only to stop threats against our own nation; to guard our interests. Other countries, like in that boot pic, that’s their problem, it is they that deal with it as they should.

[Overcast]

Yeah, have to agree. Of course, allies - if they need help - as in ask for it, I see no harm there. Of course, 'allies' guard our interests as well.

I'm pretty cynical of government anymore. Seem more like puppets to me - not all of them, of course. Like in anything else there are good and bad in any particular group. I guess this sums up my thoughts:

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial
element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since
the days of Andrew Jackson."
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt
(1882-1945), 32nd US President
November 21, 1933

[Daywolf]

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial
element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since
the days of Andrew Jackson."
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt
(1882-1945), 32nd US President
November 21, 1933Actually I'd say China does. That's our fault though, we buy too much foreign goods and grant free/favored trade to economic rivals while accepting their loans. Then we have a little problem called the federal reserve, something that truly needs to be abolished, and then to IRS reform which has been given waaaay too much power as of late.

[Hasbinbad]

You're wrong and it is patently absurd for you to tell me what I did and why.
I only spoke in facts. You were offered a job, which you took. It's very simple. The U.S. Military is an employer.
Like my father before me and like his father before him, I served my country before I began my career.
Why do you use the euphamism "served my country?" Why don't you just say "was employed by the [applicable branch of the U.S. Military]?"
I would have made more money working at McDonald's.
That says a lot about the employer.
I am not whining about anything.
You took a job and now you want to feel special. People don't treat you special because of one of your early career decisions, and you're now venting. That's pretty much whining.
I love my country and I would serve again if called upon.
They need people.. You should re-up your contract.
I am not a mercenary;
That is not even debatable. You took money for being in a military.
I am not a whore.
You are the only one who used that word.
One of us seems to think about everything in terms of dollars; I do not.
How you choose to think of the things you do doesn't alter the fundamental facts. You took money for whatever it is you did in the military.
Your argument style is extremely offensive, insulting and unattractive.
As is my wont.
In one short post you have managed to suggest that I am not only a whore but a cheap whore, that I am brainwashed, that I am deluded, and that I am a murderer.
I didn't suggest these things, I stated them; there is a subtle, yet important difference. Also, when I said "how many bullets you've taken while killing brown children," that was a more general indictment against any people who have actually done those things, not necessarily you. I had thought you more educated than to assume my usage was concrete.. ..unless of course.. ..you HAVE done those things.
All this because you do not agree with me that America's problems can be solved and that it is up to us, the American people, to help solve them.
Actually it's because you (and many others) seem to think America has some kind of right to solve the world's problems however the U.S. Government sees fit because we have monetary interests in different parts of the world. I would like to see how far you get if you invested a certain amount of money in some company, and then when they stopped doing what you told them, you go in there with some guns and try to tell them what to do differently.. This is an almost exact analogue to what the US does in foreign nations. This also makes me wonder why you ignored the actual content of my post and instead just focused on defending yourself.
I suggest you read your own words carefully and reflect on what they say about you.
Backatchya G.I. Joe.

[blizzil]

Remember what Reagan said "Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem".

So that makes it true?

He sold the country out for the sake of short term profits and shipped all the mfging base to China

You can quote him all you want

But its wrong :P

[Daywolf]

So that makes it true?

He sold the country out for the sake of short term profits and shipped all the mfging base to China

You can quote him all you want

But its wrong :PWho said Reagan was perfect? ..I mean besides what you claim, which is debatable. His comment was correct, but he was not perfect and thus what he said is void? Your post is missing punctuation, thus your comment is null and void. :P

...but wtg, how to totally sidestep the context of the post and try to turn it into a meaningless debate. Ah well...

[Hasbinbad]

Who said Reagan was perfect? ..I mean besides what you claim, which is debatable. His comment was correct, but he was not perfect and thus what he said is void? Your post is missing punctuation, thus your comment is null and void. :P

...but wtg, how to totally sidestep the context of the post and try to turn it into a meaningless debate. Ah well...
Actually, that's not what he did.
..that's what YOU did..

End the nonsense, support the argument. Don't just say "his comment was correct," as if you stating it makes it true; support the argument.

How, exactly, is government the problem? What did Reagan mean by this? What do YOU mean by this?

[Daywolf]

Actually, that's not what he did.
..that's what YOU did..

End the nonsense, support the argument. Don't just say "his comment was correct," as if you stating it makes it true; support the argument.

How, exactly, is government the problem? What did Reagan mean by this? What do YOU mean by this?
How about try reading my post that the quote was from for your answer?
This idiom is called "throwing the baby out with the bath water". If he is going to throw out my entire argument over his dislike for Reagan with Reagan's imperfections beyond the issue at hand, than he too should be held to the same standards including his punctuation. I really don't give a flying hoot about punctuation or spelling, but if he is going to set a standard so to dismiss my argument, than he should live up to his own standards as well, in all forms. Nursemaid?

[Hasbinbad]

All I'm asking is that you support your statement..

[Daywolf]

All I'm asking is that you support your statement..What, that more government programs or the large amount of existing programs are really-really bad? We don't need FDR or Reagan, we don't need government control to this existing extent. For every one government job created, two existing private sector jobs are destroyed. Whatever you think of Reagan, his statement was correct. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x59wNGHe6iI

So what, it continues? The elites invest in "green programs/jobs" then boost it through government programs/incentives thus making a fortune. Doesn't matter if they are good or bad, just makes them a whole lot of money whatever the outcome. It's corruption, and rep or dem they need to be run out on a rail.

[blizzil]

Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.

Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a shitty actor and foolish tool.

Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded shit-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.

The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our current chimpking. Reagan just didn't give a shit. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of it's own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a fucking asshole.

On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that dumb piece of shit would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.

And on the domestic front - holy shit the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't shit directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this shit, then go read a fucking book or two.

Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Alli Babba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.

Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all it's inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.

I really don't have time for this shit. So let me conclude,

Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Fuck Ronald Reagan. And then fuck him again.


This is some fucked up shit.

Go ahead, defend Reagan’s policies all you want. Back then, his policies yielded great results. However, it laid the groundwork, via building up government debt, that will eventually destroy the country.

[Dersk]

blizzil has made a post I'm amused to say has not managed to diminish what appreciation I have for Reagan.

I'd respond with something more, but I'm quite sure nothing would make it past the irradiating hatred.

[Toony]

blizzil has made a post I'm amused to say has not managed to diminish what appreciation I have for Reagan.

I'd respond with something more, but I'm quite sure nothing would make it past the irradiating hatred.

Nah, you couldn't cut through that kind of blind hatred with a plasma cutter. I'm pretty sure Reagan ran over this guys puppy.

[Overcast]

http://site.despair.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/governmentdemotivator.jpg

[Hasbinbad]

What, that more government programs or the large amount of existing programs are really-really bad? We don't need FDR or Reagan, we don't need government control to this existing extent. For every one government job created, two existing private sector jobs are destroyed. Whatever you think of Reagan, his statement was correct.
Obviously "someone" doesn't understand how to support an argument.

[blizzil]

Nah, you couldn't cut through that kind of blind hatred with a plasma cutter. I'm pretty sure Reagan ran over this guys puppy.

He is the epitome of corporate greed upon all costs. They've become to powerful. Everyone is worried about big govt when its Corporations that have infiltrated our law making process which saw presided over a 3 decade long destruction of our labor force and manufacturing base to China.

Those policies destroyed the middle class and drove the country into a ditch.

Unfettered and unregulated corporate power is the single greatest threat to the republic.

[Daywolf]

Obviously "someone" doesn't understand how to support an argument.Answer what? You are being vague. About Reagans foreign trade?!? ..which was meant to derail my point. You are just doing the same thing as the other guy.

[Hasbinbad]

Answer what? You are being vague. About Reagans foreign trade?!? ..which was meant to derail my point. You are just doing the same thing as the other guy.
You quoted Reagan. You stated that he was correct. I'm just asking how that premise is supported other than you stating that it's true.

[waldo]

This thread makes my head hurt... So much fighting so many things that are inaccurate. I am an American, and I am proud to be an American as a member of the society, yet not so proud of my country, if that makes sense at all. You point fingers at the guy who said he was a mohawk and flame him for stating what he feels. Yes it is your right to flame, but don't tell him what opinion he can or cannot have. When settlers came to the Americas they brought sickness and destruction. The natives viewed the land as a place shared by all, so when people purchased the land the concept made no sense. They got screwed. Then America gave them land set aside specifically for them, yet when the government found that land to be useful they took it back and gave the natives worse land. Have you been to a reservation? Its like a third world country you can't say that to be a native american is extremely rewarding.

America is based on freedom, well the idea of freedom, but when did it become ok to hold people without trial for an indefinite amount of time. Its in the freaking constitution that people deserve a fair trial, yet when the patriot act passed it took that right away. The government can seize you, your posessions, tap your phone, on a whim. I love my country but the government is going to shit. We are losing our rights, and anymore the principles that guided it in the first place are no longer in effect. We point fingers at other countries and look down our noses at them, but what makes us so great? We are all humans on this earth trying to live. Yes America helped in ww1 and ww2, but there are just as bad atrocities going on in the world now that America turns a blind eye to. There is still ethnic cleansing going on in places, but those places don't affect us so we leave them be. Out of sight out of mind. I'm not saying we should be policing them but don't go saying that we are so grand at helping people around the world when some who really need it are getting a cold shoulder.

Also it is nice that we have charities for other counties, yet we still have a huge homeless problem here. The education is lacking, and the economy is down as well. People can only take so much before they have had enough. The value of the dollar is falling and the only thing backing it up is the government. I can agree with america being an experiment though, its been around less time than other empires and countries. Look at rome for example. People will only put up with so much. I will quote v for vendetta by saying "people should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

[Theldios]

Right....

Except we have significant communities of Sudanese, Somalian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Indian, Pakistani, (including both large Hindu and Sikh groups), Philippine, Lebanese, etc, etc

Do your research, then you can holla.

Well if you want to talk about ethnic diversity lets just count only the Latino population in America VS all ethnic populations in Canada
Latinos in USA 42.7 million
Total amount of ethnic groups in Canada 11 million.
if we were to count all the ethnic groups in the USA it would be =to if not more than the total population of Canada which is 33 million compared to USA total population of 309 million (as per last us census)

Lets look at GNP and compare shall we
Canada GNP 1.29 trillion
USA GNP 14.72 Trillion 11 X more than Canada

I am sure I can cite many many more ways that I believe that the USA has much more to offer than Canada to a prospective citizen but hey I am probably about to be called biased or racist or some such thing over believing I still live in the greatest country on the planet.
Sure we have our flaws and he who is w/o theirs can cast the 1st stone.
But the great thing about America is we over come all adversity to in the end come out better than ever before it is happened time and time again in our history. When we are at our lowest that our people (and I mean all of them) pick them selves up by the boot straps and get their asses to working on making our America a better place for everyone. We will hit that low sometime in the future and I hope we prove all you nay sayers wrong once again.
God Bless the USA and God bless you all cause where one achieves others will follow

[JayDee]

Well if you want to talk about ethnic diversity lets just count only the Latino population in America VS all ethnic populations in Canada
Latinos in USA 42.7 million
Total amount of ethnic groups in Canada 11 million.
if we were to count all the ethnic groups in the USA it would be =to if not more than the total population of Canada which is 33 million compared to USA total population of 309 million (as per last us census)

Lets look at GNP and compare shall we
Canada GNP 1.29 trillion
USA GNP 14.72 Trillion 11 X more than Canada

I am sure I can cite many many more ways that I believe that the USA has much more to offer than Canada to a prospective citizen but hey I am probably about to be called biased or racist or some such thing over believing I still live in the greatest country on the planet.
Sure we have our flaws and he who is w/o theirs can cast the 1st stone.
But the great thing about America is we over come all adversity to in the end come out better than ever before it is happened time and time again in our history. When we are at our lowest that our people (and I mean all of them) pick them selves up by the boot straps and get their asses to working on making our America a better place for everyone. We will hit that low sometime in the future and I hope we prove all you nay sayers wrong once again.
God Bless the USA and God bless you all cause where one achieves others will follow

I dunno, I mean GSP has some decent GnP and he's from Canada. I mean it's not russian GnP (Fedor), but it gets the job done.

[Daywolf]

You quoted Reagan. You stated that he was correct. I'm just asking how that premise is supported other than you stating that it's true.
Just like I stated earlier, the more government regulation, the more the mom-n-pop gets hurt. I didn't only quote Reagen, but mentioned the founding fathers as well. Government does nothing right. It had very limited power compared to today, as even a large consensus is protesting now. Of course even back then, there were supporters of king George, and today there are those that want the gov to be their wet nurse. No more kings!

[Taxi]

Just like I stated earlier, the more government regulation, the more the mom-n-pop gets hurt. I didn't only quote Reagen, but mentioned the founding fathers as well. Government does nothing right. It had very limited power compared to today, as even a large consensus is protesting now. Of course even back then, there were supporters of king George, and today there are those that want the gov to be their wet nurse. No more kings!

Right so i guess we should be going back to private firemen and such :rolleyes:

This anti-government everything is silly coming from americans, like everything a government touches is going to fail. Here in Montreal we have a 4 story high central library with 100 year old documents everyone can access and tons of data on microfiles, thats the kind of things society projects can give birth too.
Governments arent inherently bad, its just a way for things to get done collectively. Its easy to see that when for-profit invades everything, only a couple of people "win" and alot of people "lose" like making healthcare a money making industry.
You can have bad governments but doing things collectively isnt inherently bad. Like the firemen example, it can work on alot of levels.

[Daywolf]

Right so i guess we should be going back to private firemen and such :rolleyes:

This anti-government everything is silly coming from americans, like everything a government touches is going to fail. Here in Montreal we have a 4 story high central library with 100 year old documents everyone can access and tons of data on microfiles, thats the kind of things society projects can give birth too.
Governments arent inherently bad, its just a way for things to get done collectively. Its easy to see that when for-profit invades everything, only a couple of people "win" and alot of people "lose" like making healthcare a money making industry.
You can have bad governments but doing things collectively isnt inherently bad. Like the firemen example, it can work on alot of levels.Well that's what the peeps from the north tried to tell us in 1812, but how did that work out for you guys, ay? :o

btw Canadian health care = bus ticket south lol fuels our economy to help keep prices low and availability high. Canadians live another day. win-win. Don't worry, come November our existing health care system will be back on track as 0bama-care gets thrown out. Canadians will continue to have access to the best care in the world here :thumbsup: Personally, I get the inclination that 0bama wants this new system so to kill off all the Canadians thus have access to their resources. But we luv Canadians ...as long as when they come here they come in legally ;)

Edit:

This anti-government everything is silly coming from americans, like everything a government touches is going to fail.
And for the record, I'm not a 15yo Anarchist. There is a diff between anti-gov and pro- constitutional gov. Our founding docs preeetty much go along with the "everything a government touches is going to fail" idea.

[Theldios]

Your cell phone is in your pocket.
He clutches the cross hanging on his chain
next to his dog tags.

He knows he may not see some of his
buddies again.

You walk down the beach,
staring at all the pretty girls.
He patrols the streets,
searching for insurgents and terrorists.



He's told he will be held over
an extra 2 months.

You call your girlfriend and
set a date for tonight.
He waits for the mail to see if there is
a letter from home.

You hug and kiss your
girlfriend, like you do everyday.
He holds his letter close and
smells his love's perfume.

You roll your eyes as a baby cries.
He gets a letter with pictures of his new child, and
wonders if they'll ever meet.

You criticize your government,
and say that war never solves anything.
He sees the innocent
tortured and killed by their own people

and remembers why he is fighting.

You hear the jokes about the
war, and make fun of men like him.
He hears the gunfire, bombs
and screams of the wounded.

You see only what the media
wants you to see.
He sees the broken bodies lying around
him.

You are asked to do some thing
by your parents. You don't.
He does exactly what he is told even
if it puts his life in danger.

You stay at home and watch TV.
He takes whatever time he is given to call, write home,
sleep,and eat.

You crawl into your soft bed,
with down pillows,and get comfortable.
He tries to sleep but gets woken by mortars

and helicopters all night long.

[Humerox]

Sadly, the way it's always been. It's a thankless endeavor.

Nicely framed. :)

[Toony]

Right so i guess we should be going back to private firemen and such :rolleyes:

I'm sure there are federal firemen somewhere...

[Rael]

We take them into our hospitals and cure them


And how much do you charge them for the privilege?

Sorry, couldn't resist :P

[Edgetiq]

WTF Why did Alawen get banned? I remember him from Sullon Zek