Whoa... this guy is pretty hardcore

[23*]

hehehe...thats funny

kinda makes me think that I'm too rational for this thread!

[One Eyed Cat]

What is wrong with getting older? Yeah, it's your responsibility to not grow into being a sucky person, but I'm totally against the notion that somehow the inexperienced youth are intrinsically less sucky. It's usually young jerks that make older people want to give up on being cool.

I love old people personally (depending on the individual obviously) They tend to have greater wisdom and are often cool as well. Getting older doesn't bother that much. Plus, my brother in law is a plastic surgeon

OEC

[Morning Glory]

naw.. but you gotta have a little fun too, sometimes. you can't let impending attacks by wild beasts and governments, and senior citizens keep you from going out and having a good time, that's what I say.

[One Eyed Cat]

I've never had a senior citizen prevent me from having a good time. I fear neither the government or wild beasts. If they knock me out of the sky, I'll go down with a smile on my face. I seriously doubt young people running the country would make it any better.

OEC

[23*]

I disagree, I think there should be an age restriction on being part of the government.

only 20% of the existing leaders and coordinators should be allowed to remain in their jobs. These would be voted for publicly , this would mean that only the people doing their jobs properly (or paying the right people) would remain. The rest would have to be between 18 yrs & 30 Yrs.

Out with the old blood & in with the new.

we need change.

[23*]

plus...you can be a war criminal without being convicted of war crimes.

for example, if you saw someone breaking into your house you would know that they were a criminal right? You wouldn't have to wait for the police to tell you.....or would you?

but I am interested to know what all my critics have to say about this.....

[Morning Glory]

well, theoretically yes. we have a little thing called "innocent until proven guilty." which really means nothing, of course your going to be called guilty, sometimes even if you are innocent, and more often then not it's really only to insure that the guilty ones are proven innocent.

[23*]

???

the point is that you see the robber breaking into your house so you know that he is a criminal.

Unless you're suggesting that there is no war in Iraq?

[Morning Glory]

no man, you're missing the whole point... the point is that what YOU see doesn't matter. it's like karyn said, the winners are the one's tha make the rules, and the cardinal rule is that they keep on winning, at the expense of all other losers.

[23*]

that is absurd!



so I see a robber breaking into my house and know that he is a criminal but according to you I have to wait until the police confirm it for me?

Do you have so little faith in yourself?

[Morning Glory]

not according to me, according to the one's that make the laws. I do have faith in me, and I make my own law, and so I am a criminal to thier law, just like their wars are a crime to me, and a win to them, you see?

it's just a power structure. all the semantics aren't emotions and beliefs, there's just the one belief (power) that extorts the beliefs of others to justify the means.

[23*]

?? You made it clear that GWB could not be considered a war criminal because he hasn't been sentenced.
you seem to be back-peddling ....lets forget about the whole thing.

unless Karen comes back of course...

[Morning Glory]

patriotism, terrorism, war, crime... just buzz words, wheels in the system, that mean something to some people, but nothing in reality, so that they will do what those in power want them to, which is to keep them in power.

[23*]

I agree completely...i just finished an essay Criticising Aristotelian logic....but we need law and its not enough just to do what you say...

[tinstar]

OK, joining this thread is clearly like trying to catch a bottle rocket. But I will do my best. From an American who is neither Liberal/Democrat nor Conservative/Republican...

Most of the foreign wars that the United States has engaged in have been incorrect. They are fought with the most backwards of morals. In this case, what the US needs to recognize is that our enemy is a philosophical one. Militant Islam and ANYONE who even thinks about supporting it.

Currently, the majority of European governments AND the US are far too weak in recognizing this. The French (who still haven't gotten over the fact that we saved them from the Nazis in WWII and kicked their asses in the Revolutionary War) and many other European countries have an anti-American, socialist slant in their politics. The US should NEVER count on these countries for support - our government is not an extension of the UN and should NEVER put world opinion before the best interest of the American people.

I am sure there is more to be said, but I'll quit there. Note that I am interested in reading responses to this, but if y'all are going to namecall and not uphold your argument with rational thought, I'm out!

[23*]

Europe is not weak; our governments just have a habit of thinking before they act. Obviously this slows things down somewhat.

The French couldn't give a shit about you saving them & Europe feels much more indebted to Russia than America.

I think in general we Europeans are not inclined to invade sovereign nations these days....it has little to do with historical grudges

[Morning Glory]

OK, joining this thread is clearly like trying to catch a bottle rocket. But I will do my best. From an American who is neither Liberal/Democrat nor Conservative/Republican...

- our government is not an extension of the UN and should NEVER put world opinion before the best interest of the American people.

I find it hard to take it very seriously that you are impartial when you say that america should worry about itself, and not the rest of the world. That's a pretty conservative viewpoint.

what the US needs to recognize is that our enemy is a philosophical one. Militant Islam and ANYONE who even thinks about supporting it.

Once again, a generalization. america is not one man, it's not a hundred men in washington. it's the people that make up the body of this country, too often people fail to realise that. and each person has the ability to make up thier own mind about thier beliefs, since there are more than two philosophies, how can you say it's a battle between them? It's my philosophy, and many other's in america and the wordl, that "Militant Islam" is just as much of an enemy as Militant Christianty aka. George Bushism.

Most of the foreign wars that the United States has engaged in have been incorrect. They are fought with the most backwards of morals.

you are right, but not for that reason. they fought for a backwards morality, but it's not spelled PHILOSOPHY, it's spelled $$$. nearly ever war we fought in was because we stood to lose or gain economic power. During WWI we sold arms to both sides, and didn't get involved until it hit us personally (which seems to be your approach). Likewise, in WWII we stayed out until the war was nearly over, we were prepared to let Hitler have europe, but when they joined up with Japan, if hitler suceeded we'd lose our control over asia, which was a major economic partner since the 1800's. Furthermore, after the war with Stalin now in opposition to us, the CIA hired nazis and excused them from facing war crimes charges. we event went so far as to smuggle a nazi named Barbie out of europe when he was to be tried by france. the man was known as "the bitcher of leone" for having order the execution of an entire orphanage of children. In the 60's we invaded the country of vietnam, once again to keep economic ties with asia. if we were so concerned about the spread of communism why not invade cuba, or indonesia? we did the same to the middle east throughout the 80's and 90's, and are still doing it today. if we are so opposed to terrorism, why invade a country with no terrorist ties like iraq, and not a country that's known for funding terrorism like saudi arabia? whose royal family also happens to be close freinds with some US diplomats, and who subsequently supplies us with most of our oil.

[23*]

I find it hard to take it very seriously that you are impartial when you say that america should worry about itself, and not the rest of the world. That's a pretty conservative viewpoint.

I thought the very same thing....after he posted "no name calling" I was very tempted to just write after it "SO you're a Red American then?"

It's my philosophy, and many other's in america and the wordl, that "Militant Islam" is just as much of an enemy as Militant Christianty aka. George Bushism.

And mine.

In the 60's we invaded the country of vietnam, once again to keep economic ties with asia. if we were so concerned about the spread of communism why not invade cuba, or indonesia? .

good point....never really thought about that.

[tinstar]

Wow. Lots to respond to here. First off, I can accurately say that I DO believe that Christianity and all religion in general is the enemy of modern life. And if it isn't EVERYONE's enemy, then it is at least mine. What I mean by philosophical enemies is that at base, most religions value DEATH over life. Christianity hangs on the cross just as Islam drives into buildings. The actions are motivated by the philosophies.

Quote:
and each person has the ability to make up thier own mind about thier beliefs, since there are more than two philosophies, how can you say it's a battle between them?------------------------------------------------------
It is true that everyone has the ability to make up their mind, but when their mind leads their body to move to murder, things change. When another man's philosophy is that he should kill me or that, in general, I deserve death, and causes him to act as such, he becomes my enemy.

Note that killing happens in many ways. Bombing a building is actually quite primitive. The Catholic church has been killing people for years - destroying their sense of humanity, destroying all pleasure, making money and scientific progress evil... the list goes on and on.

Unlike Islam, however, they learned from the Crusades. Why actually fight, when you can make it appear that you are friendly and kind and nice and make everyone want to sign up and eat the body of Christ on weekends? Why engage in a discussion of black and white morality when the Church offers confession, repentance, and purgatory? If Muslim leaders are smart, they will stop killing people outright, and simply become cuddly and friendly so no one notices they are truly dying inside.
=============

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
I find it hard to take it very seriously that you are impartial when you say that america should worry about itself, and not the rest of the world. That's a pretty conservative viewpoint.


I thought the very same thing....after he posted "no name calling" I was very tempted to just write after it "SO you're a Red American then?"

------
Never said I am impartial. I have my own best interests in mind throughout, as well as the interests of those people I love. It is because of this that I am not in favor of over-reaching the boundaries of the government's duty to its people. A government is set up to provide protection to people who CHOOSE to pay for it (taxes) and ACCEPT that protection (indicated by living within the boundaries of the country).

I assure you, there is nothing RED about me. I truly despise communism. An example of name-calling would be me calling you a "FUCKWIT" or "COCKDRIP." That would be rude and counter-productive, so I promise not to do it.

--------
you are right, but not for that reason. they fought for a backwards morality, but it's not spelled PHILOSOPHY, it's spelled $$$.
=====

Everything first proceeds from a philosophy, acknowledged or not. Money and how it is used arises from this. Horse before cart.

--------
nearly ever war we fought in was because we stood to lose or gain economic power. During WWI we sold arms to both sides, and didn't get involved until it hit us personally (which seems to be your approach). Likewise, in WWII we stayed out until the war was nearly over, we were prepared to let Hitler have europe, but when they joined up with Japan, if hitler suceeded we'd lose our control over asia, which was a major economic partner since the 1800's. Furthermore, after the war with Stalin now in opposition to us, the CIA hired nazis and excused them from facing war crimes charges. we event went so far as to smuggle a nazi named Barbie out of europe when he was to be tried by france. the man was known as "the bitcher of leone" for having order the execution of an entire orphanage of children. In the 60's we invaded the country of vietnam, once again to keep economic ties with asia. if we were so concerned about the spread of communism why not invade cuba, or indonesia? we did the same to the middle east throughout the 80's and 90's, and are still doing it today. if we are so opposed to terrorism, why invade a country with no terrorist ties like iraq, and not a country that's known for funding terrorism like saudi arabia? whose royal family also happens to be close freinds with some US diplomats, and who subsequently supplies us with most of our oil.------------------------------------------

1) Don't forget. WE is not ME.
2) You bring up a lot of great examples. This is why the US government needs to re-evaluate firstly, its role in the lives of Americans, and secondly its role in the rest of the world. If the government stopped interfering with American businesses and their trade in general, we would all be better off. On one hand, going to war for oil wouldn't happen, on the other hand, Microsoft wouldn't be called to trial for "monopoly" and Martha Stewart wouldn't be in jail.


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

This is a great discussion! Thanks for your excellent responses.

[Morning Glory]

yes, perhaps the term "we" is a bit inapropriate, I just meant it as "the american government" I more or less used the term to show that I am an american and someone who knows what it's like in america, It's a little bit harder to say " I am an american... now here's what's wrong with America." then it may be to be one of the victims of america and say what's what wrong with it. I guess.

I really don't like the communist america either. it's a very fine line and a hard choice, if the government didn't have any regulations over business they may be a lot worse then they are, however because of there involvement it allows them to do mutual favors for each either. IE: a corporation putting up the money to lobbey for an elected official who will in turn work to pass laws that will benefit that business ( and may not be the most ethical.) The laws of monopoly don't really apply to practicality, if one business control 95% percent of the market, then they'll claim not to be a monopoly by demonstarting that they DO have a competitor, even though that so-called competetor can't offer any real competition. In the 1700's when all these laws were drafted the government had pretty much no control over business, but nearly all the business was small privately owned mom-and-pop shops. I don't they could have imagined the amount of influence big corporations have today.

[One Eyed Cat]

Here's my personal favorite

Gather 'round while I sing you of Wernher von Braun,
A man whose allegiance
Is ruled by expedience.
Call him a Nazi, he won't even frown,
"Ha, Nazi, Schmazi," says Wernher von Braun.

Don't say that he's hypocritical,
Say rather that he's apolitical.
"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun.

Some have harsh words for this man of renown,
But some think our attitude
Should be one of gratitude,
Like the widows and cripples in old London town,
Who owe their large pensions to Wernher von Braun.**

You too may be a big hero,
Once you've learned to count backwards to zero.
"In German oder English I know how to count down,
Und I'm learning Chinese!" says Wernher von Braun.

[karyn]

yes I know what Nazism is!

did you need to look it up in the dictionary?

plus...you can be a war criminal without being convicted of war crimes.

for example, if you saw someone breaking into your house you would know that they were a criminal right? You wouldn't have to wait for the police to tell you.....or would you?

i think morning glory already covered this, but the point is that the laws are made by who is sovereign and not by the beholder. if i saw someone breaking into my house and i lived somewhere that was against the law, i might feel like it was a pretty safe assumption that they were in some sense criminal, even before they were convicted. if the fbi broke into my home because they had reason to believe i had a meth lab there, then they would not be criminals even if their information was faulty and they did the exact same amount of damage. BECAUSE THEY SERVE THOSE WHO ARE SOVEREIGN AND MAKE THE RULES.

[One Eyed Cat]

i think morning glory already covered this, but the point is that the laws are made by who is sovereign and not by the beholder. if i saw someone breaking into my house and i lived somewhere that was against the law, i might feel like it was a pretty safe assumption that they were in some sense criminal, even before they were convicted. if the fbi broke into my home because they had reason to believe i had a meth lab there, then they would not be criminals even if their information was faulty and they did the exact same amount of damage. BECAUSE THEY SERVE THOSE WHO ARE SOVEREIGN AND MAKE THE RULES.

If they broke into your house, how would you know they were FBI?

OEC

[Morning Glory]

Didn't we allready have this exact same discussion before? it's like totally deja vu, or maybe i'm just psychic/ insane.

[tinstar]

yes, perhaps the term "we" is a bit inapropriate, I just meant it as "the american government" I more or less used the term to show that I am an american and someone who knows what it's like in america, It's a little bit harder to say " I am an american... now here's what's wrong with America." then it may be to be one of the victims of america and say what's what wrong with it. I guess.

I really don't like the communist america either. it's a very fine line and a hard choice, if the government didn't have any regulations over business they may be a lot worse then they are, however because of there involvement it allows them to do mutual favors for each either. IE: a corporation putting up the money to lobbey for an elected official who will in turn work to pass laws that will benefit that business ( and may not be the most ethical.) The laws of monopoly don't really apply to practicality, if one business control 95% percent of the market, then they'll claim not to be a monopoly by demonstarting that they DO have a competitor, even though that so-called competetor can't offer any real competition. In the 1700's when all these laws were drafted the government had pretty much no control over business, but nearly all the business was small privately owned mom-and-pop shops. I don't they could have imagined the amount of influence big corporations have today.

You are so right. Monopoly laws are the perfect example of socialism/communism creeping into American policy. If the government didn't regulate business, then where would the politicians go for payoffs from large corporations in return for votes? Nowhere! Where would the lobbyist who runs up the Enron expense account to provide strippers and coke for the elected officials so they can continue to do dirty business be? Unemployed!

[23*]

Here's my personal favorite

Gather 'round while I sing you of Wernher von Braun,
A man whose allegiance
Is ruled by expedience.
Call him a Nazi, he won't even frown,
"Ha, Nazi, Schmazi," says Wernher von Braun.

That song rocks Cat dude....I've printed it out and pinned it on my board.

[23*]

if the fbi broke into my home because they had reason to believe i had a meth lab there, then they would not be criminals even if their information was faulty and they did the exact same amount of damage.

Didn't I mention that they were carrying your TV.?

[karyn]

If they broke into your house, how would you know they were FBI?

OEC

i wouldn't know. i would probably experience it exactly the same as if it were someone who would be defined as a criminal. crime is named in law generalities beforehand and in personal specifics after the fact, always by those who have rule of law and not by victims. is it possible to change the definition of crime? sure. if the scum who gave dioxin to that poor man in the ukraine get ousted and other people are in power, then those horrible people will become criminals, but so long as they win and maintain rule they are horrible but they are not criminals.

[karyn]

Didn't I mention that they were carrying your TV.?

i don't own a tv. i hate tv. what is your point?

[23*]

i don't own a tv. i hate tv. what is your point?

I was waiting for you to say that....how predictable.

look, my point is that when you see a group of people breaking into your home and stealing your possessions, you KNOW that they are criminals.....if you have to wait until the police inform you of this and make it offical then you are retarded....plain and simple.

The same applies to GWB., we know that his boys are in Iraq murdering people, we also know that his reason for being there (WMD) is a blatant lie. This makes the war illegal.

Now this all began when I called GWB a war criminal, now try putting 1 and 1 together.....

[Tequila Zaire]

We've had legal wars?

Their is no such thing as a legal war or morality in war...they are concepts that can be skewed and manipulated by those for and against whatever conflict one wants to discuss.

[23*]

We've had legal wars?

Their is no such thing as a legal war or morality in war...they are concepts that can be skewed and manipulated by those for and against whatever conflict one wants to discuss.

go be a Nihilist if you want to.....but this is about whether or not GWB. should be considered a War Criminal....

Human Life should be valued.....

[Tequila Zaire]

my point exactly

Actually Karen, this is a very interesting topic. No one is saying that Americans are better than Europeans or vica-versa. But we (europeans) do think differently in general....and we certainly have different approaches and mannerisms. That is why so many europeans are completly bewildered by American politics....they fail to recognise that we in Ireland (insert your european country here)have more in common culturally with France or the Czech Rebublic (insert any other European country here) than with America. Its not a racial distinction, its a cultural one.

Goes both ways really...both sides like to claim their governments are vastly diffrent yet they act all the same...look at ....

The U.S. In Vietnam and now Iraq.
France in Vietnam and Algeria.
England in...well everywhere.
Russia in...post WW2 Europe.
Germany...WW1, WW2, etc.

Various European countries in Africa.
The U.S. in it's push West.

Too many similarities in style, methods, and outcomes to say they are diffrent...they are too alike for their own good. Same with many asian countries...

It's more of a blind way of distracting one another into seeing diffrences that really are not their in some lame attempt to justify ambitions and desires...as a species we're simply not all that different...be it on a political or cultural level. The diffrences that ARE their are so minor one has to wonder why we stand so firmly by our false uniqueness and NEED to be special.

[Tequila Zaire]

go be a Nihilist if you want to.....but this is about whether or not GWB. should be considered a War Criminal....

Human Life should be valued.....

Yeah that's what it's about Nihilism...you can't make a war criminal out of a man who's deeds are no dirtier than any other current world leader. No one gets in those positions being a boy scout...this selective scale of evil is absurd...may as well make russia's top dog a war criminal along with blair...and any other world leader who's unpopular in liberal eyes...

Human life has no base value...it's cheap, plentiful, and near endless. You only have value if you contribute in some way to the larger goal of us all as a species...funny how people get all peace loving and human rights happy when someone or something they don't like is in power but will happily ignore such human suffering on a daily baisis.

I'm sorry but if any of us were really as "human life has value" oriented we'd of had the homeless issue along with similar issues long resolved in some sane way...the smae who will protest for the rights of people half a world away rarely put time to help those down the block...soup kiches and charities aside...it's still a sad reality.

[23*]

if the scum who gave dioxin to that poor man in the ukraine get ousted and other people are in power, then those horrible people will become criminals, but so long as they win and maintain rule they are horrible but they are not criminals.

I missed this first time through.

This is essentially the very opposite of my view. What you're saying here seems absurd and ridiculous to me....i think we will just have to agree to disagree...

Peace

[Tequila Zaire]

I missed this first time through.

This is essentially the very opposite of my view. What you're saying here seems absurd and ridiculous to me....i think we will just have to agree to disagree...

Peace

What's absurd about it? Why can't you understand the IDEA that those in power are not judged by the same rules, morality, and eithics idealists wish to live by? You don't have to accept it but it's not a hard idea to understand. It's naive to think you will have saintly and "good" men and women in power...it's jsut not realistic.

To take power...political power...you need to have one hand bloody and one hand free to grab a knife and jam it into the skull of your rivals.

[23*]

we're simply not all that different...be it on a political or cultural level. The diffrences that ARE their are so minor one has to wonder why we stand so firmly by our false uniqueness and NEED to be special.

I agree with you. Essentially we are all the same....dividing maps with ink lines only serves to create an artifical separability.

Nevertheless, we do live in a world were it is currently useful to make distinctions. European politics is very different to American politics, We approach problems in a different way. At its most obvious, just watch a European election campaign and an American one....the differences are striking. If you don't see this, then you are simply not very perceptive.

[23*]

What's absurd about it? Why can't you understand the IDEA that those in power are not judged by the same rules, morality.

It is difficult for me to see how you can be so defeatist.
My whole point is that we as individuals can make judgements which are as equally valid as any leaders.

I never said that GWB. should be the only one currently being sentenced in the Hague, only that he is a useful example.

I began with "GWB is a war criminal", the absurdity is that nobody has agreed with me."

[Tequila Zaire]

I agree with you. Essentially we are all the same....dividing maps with ink lines only serves to create an artifical separability.

Nevertheless, we do live in a world were it is currently useful to make distinctions. European politics is very different to American politics, We approach problems in a different way. At its most obvious, just watch a European election campaign and an American one....the differences are striking. If you don't see this, then you are simply not very perceptive.

That's what I mean about diffrences that really don't matter...the process may be different but the outcome is the same. Just cause they run diffrent does not make the systems as diffrent as night and day...at the end of it all you still have ambitious and often time dangerous men in power. European politics have more blood on them than any honor or honestly one would like to buy into. Look at meetings of british parliment or canadian ones...yelling and screaming acting like childish brats...U.S. ones are painfully dull with all the childish bullshit handled in offices and areas away from the cameras...same outcome though.

It always breaks down to party one vs. party two with the nation and it's people coming in 2nd and 3rd to political affiliations and party position.

That's true in any country, tribe, or political system...

[Tequila Zaire]

It is difficult for me to see how you can be so defeatist.
My whole point is that we as individuals can make judgements which are as equally valid as any leaders.

I never said that GWB. should be the only one currently being sentenced in the Hague, only that he is a useful example.

I began with "GWB is a war criminal", the absurdity is that nobody has agreed with me."

Who's being defeatist? I have no stake in changing "the system" ...I work with what I'm dealt with in my lifetime and make my way around it. Despot or Dreamer in office the people I deal with and work with pay no mind to the laws and regulations they pass down anyhow.

It's like this...one can believe the hague is a place of world justice...while others see it as a sick joke concoted by those who wish to exploit it down the line.

Look you can be as anit bush as you want but do you really think anyone will take you seriously if you sell it as a "my way or your stupid" kind of deal?

This is the problem plaugeing many liberal and peace loving political parties and people...they are so sure they are right that all opposed must be stupid and wrong...you can't get anywhere with that outlook.

Personally...both sides are fucked up and filled with the same kinds of people. I'm part of a minority pandered too by the same old white men on both sides of the party spectrum and political world as a whole...so in the end...it's pointless for me to give more than a passing glance. I'm not on any political radar other than a vote in an election year....so war criminal or not...I will exploit and use those in powers to get what I need done...their faults tend to be for my favor anyhow.

You gotta look at politics on a broader level where what is siad and heard is nothing but smoke and mirrors for what really goes on...it's not about being a nihilist or defeatest...it's about working with what is really there not what we wish was their.