Rumsfeld teaching us how to piss of allies.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Clash_Master
You live in Canada, I live in America. Thats our political position.

---

First of all, I live in Canada but I am still a US citizen (for now). Second of all you do not speak for a nation, and if your nation is half the nation you and others claim it is - you would embrace all political opinions and positions. Doing any less would be, as you say, Un-American.

That's supposed to be one of the things you nation's "democracy" is based on. If you don't support it, who will.

Quote:

---

And what I meant by "Its neat to see stuff happan." was that its interesting to see how people react to certain things that are said, and what actions are placed. Sorry for my phrasing.

---

I am relieved that you claified this as such.

Quote:

---

So all I can do is watch the world, and thats the same for you. Unless you want to run for a political office, I say go for it. In the words of the founder of Garage Logic, "Good Luck".

---

I disagree. I think there is a lot that individuals can do. They can infom themselves. They can demonstrate. They can educate others so that they can enact change. They can call for change and do what they can to shape the future you want. There are people in the US and all over the world who are quite active in trying to impove the world and trying to combat evil. I'll admit that this is especially hard in the US because of the wonky political structure. But that's no reason to give up. You just do what you can, whatever you can.

That's how I feel anyway. To his his/her own.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jimmy Carter

Fact: During Reagan's administration every income bracket experienced growth and the economy grew at a rate unseen since the administration of John F. Kennedy.

---

You forgot to mention that an alarming percentage of this growth was based on deficit spending. Under Reagan the national debt nearly tripled. Furthermore, virtually all the growth in national wealth took place in the highest income group. Many poor and middle-class families actually lost ground, as low- and semi-skilled jobs were eliminated from the economy, or failed to keep pace with the rest of society.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by frostwolf
but answer the question, was iraq disarming as they agreed to before we started to threaten violence? look at reality, the UNITED NATIONS has used the sanctiosn for these years as a way to try to force iraq into compliance. US starts talkign seriously and iraq starts complying, no sidestepping the issue, was iraq cooperating before force was threatened?

---

It's a bogus question. Disarming Iraq is a completely bullshit excuse to invade Iraq for the US's own agenda. Everyone in the world knows that and that's why there is so much opposition everywhere.

Also, who armed Iraq in the first place? The US is the cause of the problem. Not Iraq. Invading Iraq is not the solution. It's making the problem worse.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by frostwolf
ok, the reality is there is no democracies, there never have been true democracies(the "classic" democracies dint admit women or slaves the right to vote, so they werent actual democracies.) however, what america,and the rest of the world has is a republic. a democracy would involve a full on vote of every citiczen on the issues,and a numerical majority would carry, in your average sized country this woudl be nearly impossible to maintain the integrity of. in a republic people vote in representatives who vote in accord with the implicit will of the majority of the voters. there is no democracy in the modern world, please straighten up your terminology, we support a republic.

---

Errrrr, that had nothing at all to do with what I was saying.

Quote:

---

ok, so the answer is..hmm i see no answer, you were supposed to answer wether the un inspections were effective without the real threat of military intervention, i wonder why you didnt answer that question. in fact, i think i know why you didnt answer.

---

It's a BOGUS QUESTION. The solution to the "problem" is removing the United States' self interest fom the region. The same "problem" that has been the leading factor in all of the various problems in the region for the last 30 years. Only when the US imperialism is haulted will the area be able to become stable once again.

I cannot answer your bogus question because it's irrelevent. Iraq is not a legitimate threat to the US with or without an invasion and with or without UN inspections. It's an excuse to invade a country and dominate it fo it's resources and dominate the region.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sggg
First of all, I live in Canada but I am still a US citizen (for now). Second of all you do not speak for a nation, and if your nation is half the nation you and others claim it is - you would embrace all political opinions and positions. Doing any less would be, as you say, Un-American.

---

I never said I spoke for the whole Nation. I said my political position is living in America. I do not speak for america or any other country, I speak for my self. And I said to think for your self and make your own opinions. I did not say, "WRONG SGGG YOU IDIOT! YOU THINK STUPID!" I am trying to be tolerant of others beliefs even if I don't agree with them, remember you can do that as well.

Quote:

---

I disagree. I think there is a lot that individuals can do. They can infom themselves. They can demonstrate. They can educate others so that they can enact change. They can call for change and do what they can to shape the future you want. There are people in the US and all over the world who are quite active in trying to impove the world and trying to combat evil. I'll admit that this is especially hard in the US because of the wonky political structure. But that's no reason to give up. You just do what you can, whatever you can.

---

People in America do inform themselves, people in America do Demonstrate (have you missed all the portest coverage?) And anyone can run for office in the U.S., I made that suggestion to you as you may remember. All I know that I am going to do is Vote.

Quote:

---

That's how I feel anyway. To his his/her own.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Clash_Master
I never said I spoke for the whole Nation. I said my political position is living in America. I do not speak for america or any other country, I speak for my self. And I said to think for your self and make your own opinions. I did not say, "WRONG SGGG YOU IDIOT! YOU THINK STUPID!" I am trying to be tolerant of others beliefs even if I don't agree with them, remember you can do that as well.

---

Fine, I guess.... maybe this is semantic but what you said was "I live in America. Thats our political position.". That certainly seems like you are saying that there is just one political position for people in America. Maybe it was just the wording though.

Quote:

---

People in America do inform themselves, people in America do Demonstrate (have you missed all the portest coverage?) And anyone can run for office in the U.S., I made that suggestion to you as you may remember. All I know that I am going to do is Vote.

---

I am well aware of all the demonstrations and I am overjoyed to see it. :)

Ok SGGG what I mean by "My Political Posotion is living in America" is that I live here. I hold no office or seat of any kind. My only duty is to Vote. Thats what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by frostwolf
ok, the reality is there is no democracies, there never have been true democracies(the "classic" democracies dint admit women or slaves the right to vote, so they werent actual democracies.) however, what america,and the rest of the world has is a republic. a democracy would involve a full on vote of every citiczen on the issues,and a numerical majority would carry, in your average sized country this woudl be nearly impossible to maintain the integrity of. in a republic people vote in representatives who vote in accord with the implicit will of the majority of the voters. there is no democracy in the modern world, please straighten up your terminology, we support a republic.

---

All right frostwolf, I'm "calling you on this". Democracy and Republic aren't defined as you say. There is the theory of representative democracy, which elects reps like a republic. So not everyone has to vote in a democracy. What separates the two is limits. Democracy provide for no limitations on the people's power to govern. A republic provides limitations in order to avoid any subjection of a minority by a majority. Straighten up your terminology. :p

Another item. I'm not anti-war or pro-peace. IMO, peace is a myth. The best we can hope for is tolerant cooperation. Some wars were very important and served a good purpose. The Revolutionary War, WWI and WWII were wars fought for a good and just cause. Vietnam, Korea, this war (or whatever you want to call it) are not just. Regardless of what pressure is being put on Saddam, he is disarming. I'm not pro-Saddam either and anyone who's read posts I've made in the past will understand this. I don't claim to have answers for all the worlds ills. But going to war doesn't solve anything in my opinion that can't be accomplished without force. He's disarming his chemical and biological weapons which we gave to him to kill Iranians (my people in a sense). So this a mute point to me, if he is complying then we can't do anything more. We feel some obligation to free Iraqi's who aren't all living in tyranny. Shiite muslims and Kurds are the ones being harrassed. However, no one speaks of how Turkey treats the Kurds. Or that Shiites are almost exclusive to Iran, which puts them at odds with almost the entire region. Saddam is a bad guy, but fighting a war won't save Iraq. However this is my opinion so please treat it as such.

North Korea is a bigger threat in my opinion. They have a bigger army than Iraq, much worse weapons and all the tools to use them. They're firing missiles every other week and testing all kinds of nuclear devices. So why does Bush want the SE Asia community to deal with it instead of us? Doesn't it seem like we have something personal with Iraq, which shouldn't be surprising considering our history. If we want to be the champions of the free world, we can't choose who gets to be free and who doesn't. In exchange for money, many desperate countries will do whatever we ask in order to provide meager economy for their citizens. Once again this is my informed opinion.

Now Bush wants to look like the good guy by saying he's open to delaying the Iraq vote. He's even reported to be considering just dropping the whole resolution. Can someone explain this hipocrisy? It's too late to look like Mr. Diplomacy now.

SC

Quote:

---

Originally posted by spacecowboy
Vietnam, Korea, this war (or whatever you want to call it) are not just.

---

I agree with most of what you've said in this thread, but you should have been more careful in how you grouped all these wars into the same category. At the time of the capture of Saigon, it was not uncommon for the incoming communists to confiscate belongings and entire properties of South Vietnamese families. Nor was it rare for parents to be jailed with their children for no reason and without trial. If you were smart, they'd stamp you with the label "intellectual class," give you a mindless job, and never grant you the permission to leave. Want to leave the country anyway? You'd have to spend your life savings on a bribe supplemented with some miraculous type of blackmail. Don't have money but want to escape anyway? Get thrown in jail or raped & killed by sea pirates.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by spacecowboy
Now Bush wants to look like the good guy by saying he's open to delaying the Iraq vote. He's even reported to be considering just dropping the whole resolution. Can someone explain this hipocrisy? It's too late to look like Mr. Diplomacy now.

SC

---

Can't you just be glad that he did it? Who cares what he thinks he's doing for his image!