Fascism

[Android]

in the spirit of critique week I think us yanks could spare a moment to examine our character as a nation,

http://www.ericblumrich.com/14.html

[Carnifex]

quite...disturbing....but apparently true.
(yeah,i know it's easy for me to say as an european)

[nil]

great link.

america is scary.

[gasmask]

obviously liberals made that clip. people just dont seem to understand that this country was founded on religion and its necissary to uphold morality, alot of those points the video made isnt even an insult, alot of things happening right now are necissary.

[Daunting]

err... ima let somebody else go after gasmask.

[HugeHarHar]

Hm, well obviously we're a fasict nation.

I mean, I can't get my own job.
Voice my own opinion, take note to the person who made this and the professor who came up with the points.
I can't choose where I want to go in life.
I can't live where I want.
Wait...wait a second. Yes I can.
You can twist and turn anything to make it how you want, but when it comes down to it, you're only being spoiled.

Yeah there's a lot of shit happening, that shouldn't be, a lot of wrong doing. But what's really changed in the last fifty years?

Oh, and a false election? You have to be kidding me? How ignorant can you be? It's one thing to be dissapointed that Kerry didn't get voted, the only difference between Kerry and Bush is Kerry appears more intelligent-he would of been following the same course of action as Bush. But when you get to the point where you corrupt information to fit your own desirable outlook, then yeah it's going to appear as you want it to.

Take it as you want, but over all it was just a stupid flash animation by an ignorant person based on another ignorant person's views.

[MoP]

... this country was founded on religion and its necissary to uphold morality...

I hope you're not implying that anyone who is not a religious person is immoral, there? That would be a rather silly and sweeping statement :)

However, if internet forums aren't the place for silly and sweeping generalisations, where is?

A fun watch, Mr. Jones... definitely to be taken with a pinch (or entire box) of salt, though. I have to agree that a lot of what the US has done has very serious ramifications on global politics and economy, and often it seems for the "wrong" reasons.
However I also agree with HugeHarHar.

All you happy pro-US folk might wanna check out this BBC news link - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4351863.stm

That's what the US Government cares about the economy. Friendly bunch, aren't they? Perhaps they should learn that what is best for America isn't always best for the world. There's such a thing as compromise.

MoP

[Tully]

It is obviously somewhat slanted, but I think it makes a good point. Sexism in all governments has been a factor for a long time, though I think having a woman as secretary of state would really discount it as being "rampant" as he says.

Gasmask: Founded on religion? :rolleyes: Seperation of church and state? How could the government be founded on religion if the guys who wrote the original constitution did their best to prevent the two from getting involved with one another? Too bad it hasn't worked.

[gasmask]

our morals are based on religion which is in the contsititution, they didnt want to intertwine but they kept the principles for religious and non religious to get along in a good manor like by not killing people etc. etc

[0kelvin]

people just dont seem to understand that this country was founded on religion and its necissary to uphold morality

No, the country was found on Freedom of Religion.

Nonetheless, that was rather pointless. It just made a bunch of accusations and implications and didn't back a single one up.

Here (http://www.rochester-citynews.com/gbase/Gyrosite/Content?oid=oid%3A3136)'s an interview with the author of the 14 Characteristics of Facism (who is neither a college professor or a doctor, as the flash movie would lead you to believe) that presents a much more fair and realistic view of things.


0kelvin

[Marked970]

Religion, in my opnion,and that of many socioligists, is that it is only a social institution that plays a critical role in connecting humans as a group. Thing is religions pass on from one religion to another. Soon, there won't be a religion as we think of it, rather science and commen ideals will replace it. Can't really base a country off of that can you?

My view of the US is that it won't be lasting much longer, and it took a turn for the worse with Bush.

[jetpack42]

I watched it with my 1lb container of Morton's Iodized Salt. :yayca:

[evildisco]

Sieg heil Amerika. :yayca:

Nothing new meh.

[Sinix]

Hah.. well, most of that isn't very accurate. Hard to make arguements for sexism when we're looking at rice vs clinton in 2008 (although, that makes you start to wish it WAS true). We're not very brutal and demeaning... abu gharab (sp) obviously wasn't something we celebrated. Our media is free, even if alot of the biggies might be right wing. So.. most of that is a stretch if anything. Except the intermingling of church and state, which is the US's achilles heal, IMO. It's the only thing that makes me uneasy.. and all that comes with it. Governments need to care about productivity, not good and evil

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

hmmm interesting flash video....but it definetly goes to the extreme and the creators meant it to do so. Whoever created that knows we aren't a facist nation but they are afraid of the direction that this country is going in and they want to spark debate. So let us begin..

Most of the Founders of this Great Nation (and i believe it still has greatness in it) were Deists...look it up. Deists belive that God doesn't interact with us or intefere with our lives as Christians would believe. God created everything set it in motion then left it the hell alone. Soooooo humans must govern themselves and decide through HUMAN INTERACTION what is morally right and wrong.

People, people stop believing everything they tell you at church, read just 1 book! Even the Bible!

[SJ Bennighof]

Gah... How would we not have money focused on the military during wartime?

Many of the "proofs" that this clip presents are merely pictures of a part of society shown while an aspect of Facism is read that outlines the presence of an excess said part of society. The "disregard for human rights" thing in which the soldiers involved were demoted and court-martialed, the 'excess of military spending" in which ships and tanks were shown. Wow, ships and tanks! That shows such over-spending in the military when we have ships and tanks! "Nationalism"? Come on, those were demonstrators. Liberals do exactly the same thing, only saying the opposite. "Protection of Big Business". Oh wow, big business exists in America. That's such a crime. "Scapegoats"? That just begs the question that the war was wrong. "Religion and government intertwine"... Bush is a Christian. So?

[evildisco]

hmmm interesting flash video....but it definetly goes to the extreme and the creators meant it to do so. Whoever created that knows we aren't a facist nation but they are afraid the direction that this country is going in and they want to spark debate.

Most of the Founders of this Great Nation (and i believe it still has greatness in it) were Deists...look it up. Deists belive that God doesn't interact with us or intefere with our lives as Christians would believe. God created everything set it in motion then left it the hell alone. Soooooo humans must govern themselves and decide through HUMAN INTERACTION what is morally right and wrong.

STOP BELIEVING EVERYTHING THEY TELL YOU AT CHURCH READ JUST 1 BOOK FOR GOD'S SAKE, EVEN THE BIBLE!

I second the motion, those who devised the constitution were from an Enlightenment background, thus deist and champions of reason rather than belief.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Gah... How would we not have money focused on the military during wartime?

Many of the "proofs" that this clip presents are merely pictures of a part of society shown while an aspect of Facism is read that outlines the presence of an excess said part of society. The "disregard for human rights" thing in which the soldiers involved were demoted and court-martialed, the 'excess of military spending" in which ships and tanks were shown. Wow, ships and tanks! That shows such over-spending in the military when we have ships and tanks! "Nationalism"? Come on, those were demonstrators. Liberals do exactly the same thing, only saying the opposite. "Protection of Big Business". Oh wow, big business exists in America. That's such a crime. "Scapegoats"? That just begs the question that the war was wrong. "Religion and government intertwine"... Bush is a Christian. So?

You know bro I do believe I have seen party propaganda taken to the extreme like this before on several occasions......but I could have sworn all of those instances were from the conservative republican party.....?

[SJ Bennighof]

when we're looking at rice vs clinton in 2008

I as a conservative fear the day when this happens, because it doesn't take a genius to know that Con D couldn't beat the Hilster.

[SJ Bennighof]

You know bro I do believe I have seen party propaganda taken to the extreme like this before on several occasions......but I could have sworn all of those instances were from the conservative republican party.....?

Usually not... I mean, it's fairly evenly divided. Especially getting right up close to an election. Both parties do it. And thanks for agreeing with me that this particular video is bogus.

[grand]

I remember hearing on some radio show how America fits into like 7-8 out of the 10 communist planks. I found that interesting. I find it useless to argue politics with most people, it is so hard to change anyones mind unless they are open to change.

[evildisco]

I remember hearing on some radio show how America fits into like 7-8 out of the 10 communist planks. I found that interesting. I find it useless to argue politics with most people, it is so hard to change anyones mind unless they are open to change.

Maybe stalinist but "communist" definetly no.
In the US communality can go to hell, no labour organization, no real proletariat organization, etc etc etc.

[grand]

This link was similar to what I heard on the radio, I dont agree with all of it though, I could see America going this direction. link (http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html)

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Communism???? Okay now we are reaching.

Since we are all posting political propaganda links you must check this one out, if only to hear the song: http://boss.streamos.com/real/virg001/a_perfect_circle/video/counting_bodies/counting_bodies_hi.ram?siteid=artistsite

And back to the morality question if we inherited morals from the Judeo-Christian God where did all the other religions in the world get theirs?

[grand]

A online forum is so difficult to discuss politics, anyways that video was interesting and I agree with some of it.

[endregan]

Yeah in one form or another!!

Then there is the gray area, I mean some examples only apply to some aspects.

[Grooveholmes]

Rock on Mike Malloy.

[Helium Macaroni]

Agree or disagree, it still looks really cool..


http://www.knife-party.net/flash/barry.html


Further reading. (http://www.newamericancentury.org/)

[Schlo-mo]

Is he trying to talk like comic book guy off the simpsons?

[gasmask]

another bias video, its a dam cool video i might ad, it does give good points but they are all 1 sided, not that any of this shit matters, this world is fucked, i dont see us living past another 20 years before we wipe ourselves out

[Marked970]

This link was similar to what I heard on the radio, I dont agree with all of it though, I could see America going this direction. link (http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html)
That's not happening, REAL communism would be a good thing, not the crap that's just some nut's power drive like the last bunch od 'communisms' have been.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

That's not happening, REAL communism would be a good thing, not the crap that's just some nut's power drive like the last bunch od 'communisms' have been.

Communism a good thing? Are you nuts Communism is an Utopian ideal IT NEVER WORKS. Man will always try to be more successful than his neighbor, it's human nature.

[SJ Bennighof]

That's not happening, REAL communism would be a good thing, not the crap that's just some nut's power drive like the last bunch od 'communisms' have been.

Dude, the intent of all of those previous systems was communism. It failed, and it turned into a rabid oligarchy ruled with string and bullets. REAL Communism would be a good thing, but it's only even remotely possible to have REAL Communism if everyone involved is perfect. Not gonna happen. That's why the Communist Manifesto is a fairy tale. It's a really pretty fairy tale, but a fariy tale nonetheless.

[evildisco]

Same with democracy hah...

[bRyaN]

Android...i know what your saying bro...

It extemely disheartening to know things are headed in that direction...
I believe Bush is saving all his "big plans" for this stint...he doesn't have to deal with the aftermath...

[oracrest]

I made a thread of this link, but I thought it might have a place in here as well. Its a Crossfire episode with Frank Zappa and some stubborn right wing guy. Im not trying to post this as a "hey, look at the politics of the 80's", but more in the vein of breaking down a timeless arguement between opposing political views. The subject matter may be out of date in a sense, but I think the ideas behind it are politically timeless. Almost every conversation I have heard/read/ been involved in involving politics has turned into a heated arguement. I understand that we all have strong views of the world, but I think we all need to be a little more open with each others perspective. We can talk all we want about our ideas on the subject, but when the conversation denegrates into an arguement, the meaning of the conversation dies. Its purely about "winning the arguement". that really doesnt get us anywhere. If anything, takes us back a step. Now you will refuse to look at something from someone else's view just to spite that person. Regardless of your take on the political climate right now, I think the singleminded black and white views that everyone (in general) seems to share reflects a dangerous situation in and of itself.

well, hope you enjoy this, I did! I have watched this a good 6 times in the last week.
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2658805

[SJ Bennighof]

That zappa vid was hilarious. I completely agree with everything that zappa said in there.

...

"I love it when you froth like that"

[acuna_read]

That first video applies a fair bit to the UK as well, obviously for the British though. The flag bit doesnt.

The problem is unless people are willing to bring in rioting (or perhaps a proper way of bringing about a reform) then its best to just get on with it, by that I mean your life.

Whether you agree with it or not sometimes its best to just play the system to your advantage.

Im sure someones mentioned it on here before but theres only 1 use for all those nuclear weapons people have, so when they get used try and get blown up quick, cause the burning of your skin or subsequent problems should you survive wont be nice.

Shame people dont remember that Ghandi thing, something like 'if everyone took an eye for an eye we will all be blind.' Let the fun begin.

[SJ Bennighof]

Im sure someones mentioned it on here before but theres only 1 use for all those nuclear weapons people have,

Not really. I don't believe for a second that the US would ever use nuclear weapons preemptively, not after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Merely having the nukes is in itself a use for them. Discourages other people from nuking us.

[oracrest]

That zappa vid was hilarious. I completely agree with everything that zappa said in there.

...

"I love it when you froth like that"

Notice how Mr. Lofton soon begins accusing Mr. Zappa about creating the kind of bad music they are debating, even though his music isn't being criticized, hes just there representing an opinion. this is what I mean by how the conversation plummets toward hollow arguement. this guy is so concerned with "winning", that he has completely lost sight of the issue being talked about, and has to resort to arguement tactics. Notice how he tries to start most points by trying to conversationally corner Mr. zappa, but soon abandones his point when it doesn't work. He even simply starts making stuff up to justify his point, like saying how incest has become a problem in society, which is so obviously some on the spot BS. He doesn't even consider how his point would be politically implemented if it were to be applied. when asked how it would work, he is almost at a loss for words, not even thinking that far ahead. generally I find that I side with those who consider the wider potential applications of a particular law, rather than those who are trying to implement a law simply because it addresses a specific problem, and it's far reaching affect is hardly considered. He even brings nazis into his arguement, you know, cause it always looks good to associate the other person's views with "nazis"

[acuna_read]

You cant really use nuclear weapons for cutting up your dinner or catching it can you?

They have one use, to kill people, lots of them.

Its a bit like someone carrying a knife or gun for personal self-defence, all its likely to do is to escalate a situation and get nasty.

[Mindflaw]

Not really. I don't believe for a second that the US would ever use nuclear weapons preemptively, not after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Merely having the nukes is in itself a use for them. Discourages other people from nuking us.

Not a good argument if people consider theit lifesituation hopeless they will commit terrible acts no matter if they or other dies. For example there are suicide bombers... and the death penalty does not stop people from murder other people. etc. As long as there are nuclear waste or weapons there will be people trying to get hold of it to make bombs.

Military power has throughout history only proved to be shortterm solutions.

oh and some fun one-sided movies check this site***click me*** (http://www.atmo.se/zino.aspx?articleID=399) check out the "red my lips movies" my favourite is the one in the middle at the top row (the pic with Blair)

[the_blur]

in the spirit of critique week I think us yanks could spare a moment to examine our character as a nation,

http://www.ericblumrich.com/14.html

<braces for the inevitable shitstorm that is sure to follow this bomb drop>

[SJ Bennighof]

You cant really use nuclear weapons for cutting up your dinner or catching it can you?

They have one use, to kill people, lots of them.

Its a bit like someone carrying a knife or gun for personal self-defence, all its likely to do is to escalate a situation and get nasty.

Um... what? So why do people take self-defense classes? Does a knowledge of martial arts escalate a situation, or does it just save your life if someone goes at you with a steel pipe in a street somewhere? People usually carry a concealed knife or something around so they won't be helpless if a situation does get nasty.

Not a good argument if people consider theit lifesituation hopeless they will commit terrible acts no matter if they or other dies. For example there are suicide bombers... and the death penalty does not stop people from murder other people. etc. As long as there are nuclear waste or weapons there will be people trying to get hold of it to make bombs.

I don't understand. What does this have to do with the US having nukes?

Military power has throughout history only proved to be shortterm solutions.

Like the militia during the American Revolution, yeah.

[troymcoy]

Gasmask-
this country was founded on religion and its necissary to uphold morality

haha since when was morality exclusively for the religious?

It reminds me of what some mad christians did when they prevented money getting to a cancer charity: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4289915.stm

cancer isn't an exclusively christian disease either

[Mindflaw]

Like the militia during the American Revolution, yeah.

Ok bear with me and read the stuff.

Let's look at the longterm factors that are the main reasons why America exists. (this only just a small part otherwise I would have to write pages after pages...I'll spare you that).

I'm going to take up two of the factors (before the independency war)

1. The growht of American Awerness of being American/americans and not a british colony/colonist
2. British blunders resulting in a better solidarity witthin the different colonies that disagreed.

1

In the decade before the revolution 1776 was the birth of the american nationalism, when expressions of dissatifactions that so far only been scattered now started to get revolutional power. Ok so how did this American nationalism grow strong ok here are some of the reasons

When the colonist dealt with the nature of the new continent they created new attitudes and patterns of life that was very different from the European.

When we look at the communications both economical and cultural between the colonies they got stronger during the eighteenth century. When you look at the American continents commercial fleet (trade and shipping) grow in comparison to Englands ships, which made the continent more independent from the brittish.

The inland communications got better (one of the reason to this was that the population grew) with better communications the contacts with different regions got better. Even people who didn’t travel or did any intercontinental business, now got more contact with new ideas within the continent. This e.g through growing ”american” press that had started to be more and more all-American in interests and attitude and not to the specific colony.

Hey even if you look at the colonial press way of treating and reporting their own colony, you see a growing tendency to speak of America and americans instead of british colonies and brittish colonist.

One more bonding factor was the religious movement that attacked the upper-class (british) ruled church. The preachers travel through all the colonies. (You could hence even call them the first real americans instead of just virginia-resident or pennsylvania-resident).

2

The colonies had royal govenors, but at the same time legislative communities within the colonies. Through political maneuvering the ”locals” got the upper hand against the royal govenors and their bureaucracy.

Great britain interest in North America was of course economical, thus the mercantilistic system. Although the british couldn’t stop the expanding american iron manufactures or smuggling. And with taxes that the colonist didn’t like, lead to american press agitation etc. and later (after ”the Boston tea party) there were continental mutual(except one state) boycotts etc to drive the parlament to retreat.

I have with this tried to show the growth of an own culture and isolation from the british who the colonist/...americans no longer identified with. The military power was not ”real” reason to Americas independency. Through this new american identification, attitude culture etc. could not british military power beat. Even if the british would have won they would loose in the end. Cause as long as the American identification exists it should just be a matter of time before new revolutions or the boycotts and the acts of disobediance would have beaten the british. The british only chance of victory in the long term would be to get the americans british again.


I don't understand. What does this have to do with the US having nukes?

You said argumented that USA got nuclear weapon to prevent war I say it not a good argument war will not be prevented by nuclear weapon... reread if you don't understand me.

[SJ Bennighof]

<Explanation of the social and economic factors behind the formation of a notional identity>

Yeah. And without fighting, the British would have left us of their own free will so we could make all of these socio-economic advances to establishing an American identity? Sure, ti wasn't the "real" reason, but "real" reasons are not by definition the only essential reasons. If we hadn't fought, we wouldn't be called the United States of America right now. Simple as that.

You said argumented that USA got nuclear weapon to prevent war I say it not a good argument war will not be prevented by nuclear weapon... reread if you don't understand me.

Right, so how does this relate to the fact that the US continues to hold nukes for that same reason that a man involved in a standoff with another man, both of them pointing a gun at the other, will not drop his gun. Continuing to hold his gun will not prevent the other man from shooting at him, but it does ensure that he'll have some way of defending himself if the other man decides to shoot at him. In my book it's called being smart.

[Mindflaw]

Yeah. And without fighting, the British would have left us of their own free will so we could make all of these socio-economic advances to establishing an American identity? Sure, ti wasn't the "real" reason, but "real" reasons are not by definition the only essential reasons. If we hadn't fought, we wouldn't be called the United States of America right now. Simple as that.

Military power was not the essential reason to America being America there is other ways to fight than by military force. The colonist had already built up their identity without the use of military power. I believe that America would have been even without the war through the e.g thorugh continuation of boycotts and acts of disobediance and would have won because the british would not be able to through military force beat the american identity.

Military force was the short term solution the long term solution was the american identity. the british only had military force you never win by military force alone...except if you wipe out the entire population. Military power/force will always be short term solution.


Right, so how does this relate to the fact that the US continues to hold nukes for that same reason that a man involved in a standoff with another man, both of them pointing a gun at the other, will not drop his gun. Continuing to hold his gun will not prevent the other man from shooting at him, but it does ensure that he'll have some way of defending himself if the other man decides to shoot at him. In my book it's called being smart.

LOL in my book smart is: The two men getting to know and respect eachother thus becoming friends and decide that getting rid of the guns is a better idea. No one needs to worry about being shot. Of course keeping the gun pointed no communicate... always being worried to get shot is a so much simpler "solution".

[MuffinMan]

i'm going to move either to germany or australia later in my future becuase i hate my country. i don't even pledge alligiance.

[SJ Bennighof]

Military power was not the essential reason to America being America there is other ways to fight than by military force. The colonist had already built up their identity without the use of military power. I believe that America would have been even without the war through the e.g thorugh continuation of boycotts and acts of disobediance and would have won because the british would not be able to through military force beat the american identity.

Military force was the short term solution the long term solution was the american identity. the british only had military force you never win by military force alone...except if you wipe out the entire population. Military power/force will always be short term solution.

You honestly think that because of differences in social behavior and civil disobedience the British would have packed up and left? They weren't above shooting unruly citizens at that time in history, or giving clearly innocent men drumhead trials! They would have left because of boycotts and demonstrations? It was a monarchy, man, they don't take well to civil disobedience.

LOL in my book smart is: The two men getting to know and respect eachother thus becoming friends and decide that getting rid of the guns is a better idea. No one needs to worry about being shot. Of course keeping the gun pointed no communicate... always being worried to get shot is a so much simpler "solution".

Ah. You're pointing a gun at me. I'm pointing a gun at you. We're both quite angry and don't know each other very well at all. Do you drop your gun and try to get to know me? Even if you would, would you fault someone for not dropping the gun? "They" crashed these big honking jet liners into two of "our" skyscrapers and one of "our" military facilities. We're supposed to drop the gun and try to be friends? I say we we try to become friends while keeping the guns where they are, and then we slowly and carefully put them down at the same time.

[troymcoy]

i'm going to move either to germany or australia later in my future becuase i hate my country. i don't even pledge alligiance.

Just goto Canada instead, such a beautiful place.

[N D Hill]

Just goto Canada instead, such a beautiful place.

Yeah, untill it's overrun by Americans. :P

[evildisco]

Haven't I seen this before? :ao: :al: :ad:

[Pavel Sokov]

i dont really like america and i agree with this video..

[Mindflaw]

SJ Bennighof:

As said the only way for the british to win by military power was to wipe the entire american population. And again military force is just a short term solution and yes by making America an economical loss for the british and continuing doing so would eventually driven the british away. And yes the british would probably have killed a lot of people, but a lot of people died in the war too, didn't not stop the american colonist did it. I guess we will never agree about that.

About the gun thing reread it... you obvious didn't read what I wrote..well ok I take it one more time (it's so easy to misunderstand eachother when writing): the two men getting to know and respect eachother well did I say drop weapons? no I said getting to know eachother and building up a mutual respect. When they built up respect thus becoming friends and decide that getting rid of the guns is a better idea. Ah getting the rid of the weapon at the same time. Which of course is only possible if you have built up mutual respect and thats real hard to do... Wait a minute we did not disagree in this matter i think anyway.

"They" crashed these big honking jet liners into two of "our" skyscrapers and one of "our" military facilities. We're supposed to drop the gun and try to be friends?

One of the problems was that neither Bush or Al-quaida did any good job trying to communicate. The act of terror was wrong and evil anyone arguing against that are evil too.

Bush on the other hand started war against Iraq trying to blame Saddam for involvements with the attack and having weapons of mass-destruction and in spite of UN inspectors saying we have not found anything give us more time to be totally sure...thats wrong in spite of Saddam being an evil man. Well actually the biggest problem was that Bush went to war without any plan of what to do... thinking that everything will get solved by military force alone, not knowing anything about the situation in the country or how to solve it...that error has many American soldiers paid for with their lives.

MuffinMan: man all states are evil in one way or another USA is just powerful enough to get all the attention ;) and anyway if you don't like what you see do something about it instead.

[evildisco]

man all states are evil in one way or another USA is just powerful enough to get all the attention ;) and anyway if you don't like what you see do something about it instead.

Indeed.

[sketchling]

Firstly... Yes I think that video is somewhat biased... BUT when you criticize that, you must also look VERY carefully at the media... just because its for the masses doesnt mean its ANY less biased. Media moguls are by no means immune to opinions and politics. They MAKE public opinion!

As for religion and morals... hmmm. Look at the dark ages. Look at the fact the church of england was started so henry the 8th could divorce again... I think ethical people and moral people make moral decisions(hopefully!) not religion. Though devoutly religious people are often strongly moral and decent, there are PLENTY of immoral people who use it as a cover. Religion can make people blind... and I dont think america is exempt from this. I think much of what has been done in the name of religion is appauling and highly immoral. often done by highly moral people caught up in the moment.

Hopefully americans have enough interest in history (world history too...) not to be blind to the signs... and dont think it cant happen! It always happens slowly! Nobody saw the signs in a hundred other cases. Coming from south africa, I can tell you people do some stupid things in the name of moral values... anyone know about apartheid?.

That said, America is an incredible country. It has helped many nations where nobody else cared and it has built an incredible economy on the back of hard work. It is a truly amazing place I think. Many mistakes have been made... like training bin laden etc etc, but few other countries have done as much or tried to do as much. It is just dangerous to get complacent... and ignorant of whats happening in your country... the simple fact that there is enough going round for someone like michael moore to make 'bowling for coloumbine' AND farenheid 911 is worrying! (especially as people FLOCKED to see them...why?)

What is VERY encouraging though is that he still breaths... :) As long as people can protest and make movies like android's link without fear... then its not too bad really. If they go silent, or fear recriminations... then its time to be very very scared! >:D

I hope that never happens folks, cause you got the nukes.

[Chris J. Anderson!]

My response to the link is..............yep. But who cares, we have computers and "freedom", so it doesn't matter. ;)




s a r c a s m

[SJ Bennighof]

SJ Bennighof:

As said the only way for the british to win by military power was to wipe the entire american population. And again military force is just a short term solution and yes by making America an economical loss for the british and continuing doing so would eventually driven the british away. And yes the british would probably have killed a lot of people, but a lot of people died in the war too, didn't not stop the american colonist did it. I guess we will never agree about that.

No, they could have kept an iron fist closed around people easily without doing a whole lot of actual killing. It happened in some large sections of Asia for quite awhile.

About the gun thing reread it... you obvious didn't read what I wrote..well ok I take it one more time (it's so easy to misunderstand eachother when writing): the two men getting to know and respect eachother well did I say drop weapons? no I said getting to know eachother and building up a mutual respect. When they built up respect thus becoming friends and decide that getting rid of the guns is a better idea. Ah getting the rid of the weapon at the same time. Which of course is only possible if you have built up mutual respect and thats real hard to do... Wait a minute we did not disagree in this matter i think anyway.

Yeah, we had the same two parts of the thing in mind, but were were saying different ones. We do in fact agree on this. And that means we agree that keeping the nukes is a good thing.

One of the problems was that neither Bush or Al-quaida did any good job trying to communicate. The act of terror was wrong and evil anyone arguing against that are evil too.

Okay.

Bush on the other hand started war against Iraq trying to blame Saddam for involvements with the attack and having weapons of mass-destruction and in spite of UN inspectors saying we have not found anything give us more time to be totally sure...thats wrong in spite of Saddam being an evil man.

This has nothing to do with the discussion of nukes, but Saddam did not act like an innocent man. If you were a dictator and had no WMD, would you block access to inspectors for awhile and then let them in later? Wow, big surprise that they didn't find anything.

Well actually the biggest problem was that Bush went to war without any plan of what to do... thinking that everything will get solved by military force alone, not knowing anything about the situation in the country or how to solve it...that error has many American soldiers paid for with their lives.

"without any plan"? "many American soldiers"? Dude, this has been one of the most remarkably successful wars in the history of the Earth. We swept through the country, city after city fell, and Saddam's hold on the country was broken with a startling minimum of civilian deaths and almost no US casualities. It was a huge deal when the first US soldier was killed. We had a death toll of 1 for awhile. This was one of the best-planned and best-executed military operations since this country was founded; I can't see how you could say otherwise.

Besides, none of that is Bush's job anyway. There are Generals and people like that to do that actual military planning, and they did an excellent job.

[Mindflaw]

SJ Bennighof

they could have kept an iron fist
I guess we will never agree about that.

This has nothing to do with the discussion of nukes, but Saddam...
No but you brought up the terror attack so I got into that too :P

"without any plan"? "many American soldiers"? Dude, this has been one of the most remarkably successful wars in the history of the Earth. We swept through the country, city after city fell, and Saddam's hold on the country was broken with a startling minimum of civilian deaths and almost no US casualities. It was a huge deal when the first US soldier was killed. We had a death toll of 1 for awhile. This was one of the best-planned and best-executed military operations since this country was founded; I can't see how you could say otherwise.
Bush quickly said that the war was won not many killed then, but if you look at the numbers of killed american soldiers at december 9 2004 you will notice the number is 1000 American troops killed in combat in Iraq. (source ABC news). I'm not saying that the initial battles badly planned. It was how the Bush administration handled it after they had declared the war to be won.

Iraqi civilians that has been killed are several thousand. The medical journal the Lancet published a study that estimated 98 000 iraqi deaths although so far the counted civilian Iraqi deaths are about 16 000.

we agree that keeping the nukes is a good thing.
NO nukes are bad, we have to strive for a world where we don't need nukes. although as the world is today nukes are here to stay, cause I really don't see any action toward trying to make the world a better place, from any of the countries that has nukes, they seems to prefer "pointing the gun at eachother". So yes I agree about nukes even if I don't like them.

Besides, none of that is Bush's job anyway.
When I write Bush I most of the cases mean the Bush administration. Although Bush has to approve, and Bush was the man who decided to start war (even brought up that he was compelled by God)

[SJ Bennighof]

Bush quickly said that the war was won not many killed then, but if you look at the numbers of killed american soldiers at december 9 2004 you will notice the number is 1000 American troops killed in combat in Iraq. (source ABC news). I'm not saying that the initial battles badly planned. It was how the Bush administration handled it after they had declared the war to be won.

1000 troops lost is an extremely good figure for a war, my friend. An extremely good figure.

Iraqi civilians that has been killed are several thousand. The medical journal the Lancet published a study that estimated 98 000 iraqi deaths although so far the counted civilian Iraqi deaths are about 16 000.

And how many of these have been from terror attacks on the Iraqi civilians by their own countrymen?

When I write Bush I most of the cases mean the Bush administration. Although Bush has to approve, and Bush was the man who decided to start war (even brought up that he was compelled by God)

What's wrong with that? If he believes in God and he's wrong and God doesn't exist, than it's just his own brain telling him to do it, right?

[evildisco]

One of the problems was that neither Bush or Al-quaida did any good job trying to communicate. The act of terror was wrong and evil anyone arguing against that are evil too.

Oh right THAT act of terror is evil, how about a star-spangled bomb busting through your rooftop and blowing you and your family to tiny pieces; is that good instead?

[SJ Bennighof]

Oh right THAT act of terror is evil, how about a star-spangled bomb busting through your rooftop and blowing you and your family to tiny pieces; is that good instead?

No. No, it's not good instead.

[HugeHarHar]

Muffinman - man it's sad that you take for granted what you have here, yeah the U.S does a lot wrong, but we do a lot more good. It's become a fad to say fuck america.

Think about Micheal Moore. Yeah his movies did incredable at the theaters, but they are one of the least bought DVD's out. Everyone went to see them in theaters because they wanted everyone else to see them see it. But no one really cares, it's just the "thing" to do now.

Sketchling- I agree with you man. Completly.

About the amount of Iraqi civilians killed, most of them have died from their own countrymen in car bombings and such. The reason is because the killers are trying to de-moralize the US people, by spreading how many Iraqi innocents have died.

The entire war we've used "smart bombs". Meaning bombs that are laser directed into a single room of a building, and blow that one room up, leaving the rest of the building unharmed. The whole time we've taken out who we've wanted to.

Yeah there's always mistakes, like the swedish(i think) reporter and her escort that got shot, but why did that happen? Because the escort was speeding towards a US check point, and they we're continually warned to stop, but they kept speeding on. That sounds and looks like another car bomb, espically if that's all you've been dealing with the entire time you've been over there.

I definitly want this war to end, but I understand why we're still over there. If we just picked up and left tomorrow, then the killers wouldn't stop. They wouldn't have anyone to stop them, to them it would be a free range. They would then put in somone of their own choosing and it would return to a Saddam-esque state, more than likely worse then before. We're trying to cool down this place before we just say "hey, it's all yours".

Oh, and last thing, all of the US soldiers that are over there, and all of the ones who have died, they all knew and volunteered to go over there. They were told that the chance of them of dying was more likely then the chance of coming back. It was there choice to serve, no one forced them.

I am completly proud to live here, as most are to live where ever they live. This is my home, which is something I value.

[stalecracker]

As I sit here rife with Pnuemonia... I get see a lot of fucktard psuedo-intellectualism breed insincere and patently partisan propaganda pap.

That's fine... that's one of the freedoms you have as an American.

However- I believe that as perveyors of a "non-profit orginization" touted as a bastion of higher learning for aspiring artists Andrew, you OF ALL people should keep your politics to yourself. A true teacher seeks to inspire not pollute... the fact that you would promote ANYTHING that compares the United States to Nazi Germany does nothing but lead me to the conclusion that you are a fraud. I've met you, talked to you and was always impressed with your work. Until today....

I would like to say "see ya later" to this community. I used to come here to post art and comment on what I saw here. I have noticed I spend most of my time defending a point of view.


So, Stalecracker, Joel Thomas... Is bowing out.

Bye

[Mindflaw]

Oh right THAT act of terror is evil, how about a star-spangled bomb busting through your rooftop and blowing you and your family to tiny pieces; is that good instead?

NO I never said that. What I said was that killing thousands of people are evil no matter of whos bomb it is. Killing is wrong although I belive it's ok to defend yourself like if you tried to kill me... and I in the fight kill you it's "ok", but e.g the death penalty is wrong since you no longer defend yourself, that just about revenge and will not bring anyone back. Hope I've made my standpoint clear.

What's wrong with that? If he believes in God and he's wrong and God doesn't exist, than it's just his own brain telling him to do it, right?

Read the bill of rights, if you still disagree well then it's just another thing we disagree about :)

]1000 troops lost is an extremely good figure for a war

not when it could have been avoided... you can't put a pricetag on life and say it's ok because of all the other shitty wars has been so much worse.

And how many of these have been from terror attacks on the Iraqi civilians by their own countrymen?

It's hard to get good data about it since the american forces do not keep track of how many people have been killed in the conflict in Iraq. Wonder why

About the amount of Iraqi civilians killed, most of them have died from their own countrymen in car bombings and such. The reason is because the killers are trying to de-moralize the US people, by spreading how many Iraqi innocents have died.

I'm going to qoute Scott Ritter at THE GUARDIAN
"Reading accounts of the US-led invasion, one is struck by the constant, almost casual, reference to civilian deaths. Soldiers and marines speak of destroying hundreds, if not thousands, of vehicles that turned out to be crammed with civilians. US marines acknowledged in the aftermath of the early, bloody battle for Nassiriya that their artillery and air power had pounded civilian areas in a blind effort to suppress insurgents thought to be holed up in the city. The infamous "shock and awe" bombing of Baghdad produced hundreds of deaths, as did the 3rd Infantry Division's "Thunder Run", an armoured thrust in Baghdad that slaughtered everyone in its path.

It is true that, with only a few exceptions, civilians who died as a result of ground combat were not deliberately targeted, but were caught up in the machinery of modern warfare. But when the same claim is made about civilians killed in aerial attacks (the Lancet study estimates that most of civilian deaths were the result of air attacks), the comparison quickly falls apart. Helicopter engagements apart, most aerial bombardment is deliberate and pre-planned. US and British military officials like to brag about the accuracy of the "precision" munitions used in these strikes, claiming this makes the kind of modern warfare practised by the coalition in Iraq the most humanitarian in history.

But there is nothing humanitarian about explosives once they detonate near civilians, or about a bomb guided to the wrong target. Dozens of civilians were killed during the vain effort to eliminate Saddam Hussein with "pinpoint" air strikes, and hundreds have perished in the campaign to eliminate alleged terrorist targets in Falluja. A "smart bomb" is only as good as the data used to direct it."

sketchling: agreed.

[SJ Bennighof]

Read the bill of rights, if you still disagree well then it's just another thing we disagree about :)

It is. If God doesn't exist, then he can't negatively impact Bush's decisions. If he does, then it's a good thing Bush listens to him.

not when it could have been avoided... you can't put a pricetag on life and say it's ok because of all the other shitty wars has been so much worse.

And you can't say that the Bush Administration sucks because we lost 1000 troops in a war. That's like saying that anyone who has a batting average of less than 2500 sucks at baseball.

It's hard to get good data about it since the american forces do not keep track of how many people have been killed in the conflict in Iraq. Wonder why

I'd say it's because such good data is so hard to accurately keep track of during a war...

[Mindflaw]

I'd say it's because such good data is so hard to accurately keep track of during a war...

Not even trying to keep some record at all is ignorant

That's like saying that anyone who has a batting average of less than 2500 sucks at baseball.

No one dies when someone is batting less than 2500.

Anyway I think we have said our main arguments by now at least as you could communicate them over the Internet...lol it would have been so much easier irl. It has been interesting to argue with you and I will actually keep what you have said in mind.

[N D Hill]

As I sit here rife with Pnuemonia... I get see a lot of fucktard psuedo-intellectualism breed insincere and patently partisan propaganda pap.

That's fine... that's one of the freedoms you have as an American.

However- I believe that as perveyors of a "non-profit orginization" touted as a bastion of higher learning for aspiring artists Andrew, you OF ALL people should keep your politics to yourself. A true teacher seeks to inspire not pollute... the fact that you would promote ANYTHING that compares the United States to Nazi Germany does nothing but lead me to the conclusion that you are a fraud. I've met you, talked to you and was always impressed with your work. Until today....

I would like to say "see ya later" to this community. I used to come here to post art and comment on what I saw here. I have noticed I spend most of my time defending a point of view.


So, Stalecracker, Joel Thomas... Is bowing out.

Bye

Yeah. Since when do artists express their political views? The fact you you could be so offended by Android's one sentence where suggests that we evaluate ourselves as Americans and consider the point of view of another is what I find truly funny. You were offended by the mere prospect that he disagrees with you. "Oh I was incredably impressed by his work and when I met him and he SEEMED like a nice guy then... But that was before I found out that we had differing view points."

...Yeah. You're definitely taking the high road.

[SJ Bennighof]

No one dies when someone is batting less than 2500.

That's because the stakes are lower. Doesn't mean you can expect someone to conduct a perfect war. People can't turn perfection on and off depending on whether there are lives at stake. If there's going to be a war, people are going to die. Plain and simple.

Anyway I think we have said our main arguments by now at least as you could communicate them over the Internet...lol it would have been so much easier irl. It has been interesting to argue with you and I will actually keep what you have said in mind.

And I what you have said. And I agree that we've probably both shot our wads. Nice debating with you.

[evildisco]

NO I never said that. What I said was that killing thousands of people are evil no matter of whos bomb it is. Killing is wrong although I belive it's ok to defend yourself like if you tried to kill me... and I in the fight kill you it's "ok", but e.g the death penalty is wrong since you no longer defend yourself, that just about revenge and will not bring anyone back. Hope I've made my standpoint clear.


Then following your logic, the USA are evil, since they are the cause for countless of casualties.
Pre-emptive war is not self-defense, since there is no previous act of aggression.
Either way those terrorist attacks are acts of desperation and the only viable warfare for people who have nothing left to lose.
Guess who left them with less than nothing?

[gasmask]

not the US, those people have been living in dirt since the beginning of time

[aesir]

Amusing video. It reminds me a lot of this book called Mother India which was written in the 20's. It painted out India to be an evil nation built on an obsession with sex. Even Mahatma Gandhi was shown to be an despicable person.

[the_blur]

As I sit here rife with Pnuemonia... I get see a lot of fucktard psuedo-intellectualism breed insincere and patently partisan propaganda pap.

That's fine... that's one of the freedoms you have as an American.
Bye

Damn straight, please stalecracker, don't let the door hit you in the ass as you leave.

Android has my 110% support, he may have posted inflamatory BS, but it's sure to at least wake SOME of you up.

[LaPalida]

not the US, those people have been living in dirt since the beginning of time

Yeah, but hey let's put some more dirt on them, I'm sure they won't mind.

[the_blur]

Guess who left them with less than nothing?

That is unfair...the American people never asked for that, it was the heartless corporations and their cronies that did it. The average American I am convinced would not agree with the actions of their own multinational companies, so take heart american friends, we Canadians do not _always_ look upon you with disdain from our lofty moral perch.

PS: Paul martin is an asshole for cutting education and he should be fired. I pay my taxes GLADLY if it means my friends get to do 2 more years in college. GLADLY.

[jetpack42]

but it's sure to at least wake SOME of you up.

yet again it's such a good thing we have you intellectuals around to elighten us morons.

[evildisco]

not the US, those people have been living in dirt since the beginning of time
That remark just makes you look ignorant.
Congratz you now look absolutely stupid.
Go study please before opening your mouth just for the act of it.

That is unfair...the American people never asked for that, it was the heartless corporations and their cronies that did it. The average American I am convinced would not agree with the actions of their own multinational companies, so take heart american friends, we Canadians do not _always_ look upon you with disdain from our lofty moral perch.

PS: Paul martin is an asshole for cutting education and he should be fired. I pay my taxes GLADLY if it means my friends get to do 2 more years in college. GLADLY.

Sadly the quote above shows you that the average american, thinks those people "always lived in dirt".

[Aerythes]

As I read this, I keep seeing Prometheus' Thread Monster in my head.

[gasmask]

what do you want from me evil, a fuckin report on the subject? i probably know more about it than you do, my best friend is a muslim, no one knows the whole story with the news we get. u are no different than me or anyone else, we are all living in a bubble in the US but that wont last my friend

[Jens]

not the US, those people have been living in dirt since the beginning of time

Mayby YOU only mean the guys that live in the mountains, but the USA army sure didn't. Those people have more culture than USA will ever have, because culture started here in the beginning of time.

bagdad before and after
http://www.chez.com/zoneluco/bagdad%20avant%20apres.jpg

"hometown of terrorism" Iran, where people live in dirt and eat mud, soon to be destroyed buildings.

mmhh, I think a McDonalds would look better on that square
http://www.irpedia.com/images/cities/tehran/ershad_mosque.jpg

http://www.irpedia.com/images/cities/tehran/tehran.jpg

http://www.irpedia.com/images/cities/tehran/national_garden.jpg

http://www.irpedia.com/images/cities/tehran/azadi_square.jpg

[sketchling]

yeah... one does tend to forget the only reason we still HAVE the knowledge of people like aristotle, socrates and plato is that the east kept it safe whilst europe went nuts over religion and killing/torturing people who sinned... for sins like actually thinking for themselves. (god forbid!)

You know anything about far east/ middle east history? Maybe have a look at it before makin a sweeping statement like that, gasmask. Or check it out now to back up what you say. A good many people in america seem to think like that and by inference suggest america is right to bomb the hell out of them in the name of freedom. The government certainly isnt going out of its way to show how sophisticated much of arab/mid-east culture is.

That said, a terrorist threat is not to be taken lightly and judging by 9/11, is no myth either. I just think there would be fewer terrorists if they didnt have so much to be angry about. Fixing it with MORE bombs and MORE war... thats just blind stupid!

[troymcoy]

Iran and places has some beautiful architecture
Gasmask you're living in your own bubble of ignorance, you seem to think everywhere far east of America is desert and mud huts

http://weblog.burningbird.net/photos/spiralminaret2.jpg
http://www.sarshar.com/images/p_minaret_moon.jpg
http://www.sarshar.com/images/l_alborze_range.jpg
http://www.sarshar.com/images/p_misty_house.jpg
http://www.sarshar.com/images/p_end_of_day.jpg

http://www.sarshar.com/images/p_masouleh.jpg

[glikster]

Amusing video. It reminds me a lot of this book called Mother India which was written in the 20's. It painted out India to be an evil nation built on an obsession with sex. Even Mahatma Gandhi was shown to be an despicable person.
"I knew Gandhi. He was a prick. I saw him sucking down a pork hot dog and hitting on Mother Theresa. He kept saying `Who's your diaper daddy, who's your diaper daddy?!' And if you don't believe me, I'll bitch-slap you like Shiva; I can do that, you know..."

[Undertow]

Andrew.. you're a bad bad man attempting to incite a riot;)
To comment on the military spending argument..
I'm looking around at test equipment thats last upgrades came in the early 90's in the shape of a pentium 486 and changing the vacuum tubes to integrated circuits. This was a good reminder that the general public buys into the advertisements saying that we have the greatest equipment. FYI our fleet that they show photos of is actually smaller than it was last gulf war. To further cut back on spending, sailors have been assuming multiple jobs in the fleet, and the number of personnel onboard ship (carriers being the primary focus) has been drastically cut as well. We're in a time of war and we're cutting manpower. Does that sound like extravagant military spending to you? Not to mention the news issue with the lack of armor on our vehicles. We have a locker in back that is falling apart and has a sticker on it that literally says "30th anniversary of " this station and is dated 1941-1971. They'll let us repaint the walls, but replace the asbestos counter tops and rusty old lockers? Hell no, that's asking too much. Yeah, we have nice things.. whatever
Everyone has the right to voice their opinion. I just remind the collective to be aware of all the facts including root causes. Spinning the negative side of an argument without providing all the information that led you to that conclusion is no better than nazi propoganda. Take a look around the world, ask as many people questions about what's going as you can, and formulate your own opinions don't just swallow what the media and the guy next door (who's listening to the media) have to say and take it as scripture. It's o.k. not to jump on the liberal band wagon and further feed the anti govt approach, after all, this nation was founded by people that thought that it was o.k. to do your own thinking and not let someone else do it for you.
-Mike

[SJ Bennighof]

Andrew.. you're a bad bad man attempting to incite a riot;)
To comment on the military spending argument..
I'm looking around at test equipment thats last upgrades came in the early 90's in the shape of a pentium 486 and changing the vacuum tubes to integrated circuits. This was a good reminder that the general public buys into the advertisements saying that we have the greatest equipment. FYI our fleet that they show photos of is actually smaller than it was last gulf war. To further cut back on spending, sailors have been assuming multiple jobs in the fleet, and the number of personnel onboard ship (carriers being the primary focus) has been drastically cut as well. We're in a time of war and we're cutting manpower. Does that sound like extravagant military spending to you? Not to mention the news issue with the lack of armor on our vehicles. We have a locker in back that is falling apart and has a sticker on it that literally says "30th anniversary of " this station and is dated 1941-1971. They'll let us repaint the walls, but replace the asbestos counter tops and rusty old lockers? Hell no, that's asking too much. Yeah, we have nice things.. whatever
Everyone has the right to voice their opinion. I just remind the collective to be aware of all the facts including root causes. Spinning the negative side of an argument without providing all the information that led you to that conclusion is no better than nazi propoganda. Take a look around the world, ask as many people questions about what's going as you can, and formulate your own opinions don't just swallow what the media and the guy next door (who's listening to the media) have to say and take it as scripture. It's o.k. not to jump on the liberal band wagon and further feed the anti govt approach, after all, this nation was founded by people that thought that it was o.k. to do your own thinking and not let someone else do it for you.
-Mike

<3

Will you, in a solely platonic sense of course, marry me?

[evildisco]

what do you want from me evil, a fuckin report on the subject? i probably know more about it than you do, my best friend is a muslim, no one knows the whole story with the news we get. u are no different than me or anyone else, we are all living in a bubble in the US but that wont last my friend
Knowing a muslim doesn't make you knowledgeable on the subject as you clearly demonstrated.
I've travelled and studied more than you ever will in your narrow minded life so please shut up before you cover yourself with more ridicule.

[sketchling]

First gasmask says : i probably know more about it than you do

and evildisco says I've travelled and studied more than you ever will in your narrow minded life so please shut up before you cover yourself with more ridicule.

Do you know eachother personally... cause there is no other way you could back these statements up. There is no point in making valid arguments and undermining them with unsubstantiated and rather emotionally-charged personal assaults...

It kinda makes it all into more of a spitting match than a critique... :^^;: Which is pointless!

P.S. My dad has a big gun... and a.. and... so there!

[evildisco]

The bubble thingie really got on my nerves.
And he is the one making stupid arguments that need backing.
I am just pertaining to a reasonable stance.
Either way, I did travel and live around the world, and I've always been interested in history, so I've studied it extensively.

[sketchling]

Hahaha. Yeah, no worries. Just started to sound funny. Thats why I thought it a pity to undermine the reasonable stance with tellin him to shut up. I cant say I disagree with you though. :teeth:

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Andrew.. you're a bad bad man attempting to incite a riot;)
To comment on the military spending argument..
I'm looking around at test equipment thats last upgrades came in the early 90's in the shape of a pentium 486 and changing the vacuum tubes to integrated circuits. This was a good reminder that the general public buys into the advertisements saying that we have the greatest equipment. FYI our fleet that they show photos of is actually smaller than it was last gulf war. To further cut back on spending, sailors have been assuming multiple jobs in the fleet, and the number of personnel onboard ship (carriers being the primary focus) has been drastically cut as well. We're in a time of war and we're cutting manpower. Does that sound like extravagant military spending to you? Not to mention the news issue with the lack of armor on our vehicles. We have a locker in back that is falling apart and has a sticker on it that literally says "30th anniversary of " this station and is dated 1941-1971. They'll let us repaint the walls, but replace the asbestos counter tops and rusty old lockers? Hell no, that's asking too much. Yeah, we have nice things.. whatever
Everyone has the right to voice their opinion. I just remind the collective to be aware of all the facts including root causes. Spinning the negative side of an argument without providing all the information that led you to that conclusion is no better than nazi propoganda. Take a look around the world, ask as many people questions about what's going as you can, and formulate your own opinions don't just swallow what the media and the guy next door (who's listening to the media) have to say and take it as scripture. It's o.k. not to jump on the liberal band wagon and further feed the anti govt approach, after all, this nation was founded by people that thought that it was o.k. to do your own thinking and not let someone else do it for you.
-Mike

The War In Iraq. We are all forgetting the reasons for going there.

1.Wepaons of Mass destruction-there are none.
2. Tyranncial Ruler/Theocracy-Soon to be replaced by another.
3. Oil (I believe to be the main reason)-Oil prices are going to hit an all time high..??????
4. Freedom for the people of Iraq(which bush has now converted into the main reason for going..sweeping that whole wmd thing under the rug for you conservatives)- They are not ready for democratic freedom.
5. War on Terror/Axis of Evil- The predominant participants in the 9/11 attacks were from Iran (were any from Iraq?). And going up against every Muslim nation as it appears we are doing is going to unify those who are rational with the irrational. Simply put we are creating more enemies with this war on terror than defeating.

Make no mistake it WAS a bad choice to go to war in Iraq. I don't see any benfit for going there.

[evildisco]

There's only one reason for that war, and it has nothing to do with ideology, its a war for control over economic variables(Oil price).
This is not a war "for the people", if there was any; the sole purpose is to replace infrastructure that weren't under corporate control, with the conversely opposite.
Oil prices aren't going to go down because that was the whole purpose all along, maintain inflation over it and make more profit for those tied to it.
Coincidentally, arms manufacturers are making huge profits over governmental contracts, but thats just a bonus.
For as appaling it might seem to most, a rebirth of a Soviet power and the rise of China is a good thing to some extent.
The answer, is balance of power.
The continuous pressure that the US government has made over the lifting of arm sales embargos to China from Europe and the "anti-democratic" processes in Russia; are just a product of fear from upper echelons of losing the upper hand over dominating global markets.
The cold war was a stalemate, it was not a winner/loser situation, for all the paranoia it caused it kept a huge deterrent on all out war.

[nil]

I believe that as perveyors of a "non-profit orginization" touted as a bastion of higher learning for aspiring artists Andrew, you OF ALL people should keep your politics to yourself.

...

I spend most of my time defending a point of view.
Bye

huh..?

[Undertow]

The War In Iraq. We are all forgetting the reasons for going there.

1.Wepaons of Mass destruction-there are none.
2. Tyranncial Ruler/Theocracy-Soon to be replaced by another.
3. Oil (I believe to be the main reason)-Oil prices are going to hit an all time high..??????
4. Freedom for the people of Iraq(which bush has now converted into the main reason for going..sweeping that whole wmd thing under the rug for you conservatives)- They are not ready for democratic freedom.
5. War on Terror/Axis of Evil- The predominant participants in the 9/11 attacks were from Iran (were any from Iraq?). And going up against every Muslim nation as it appears we are doing is going to unify those who are rational with the irrational. Simply put we are creating more enemies with this war on terror than defeating.

Make no mistake it WAS a bad choice to go to war in Iraq. I don't see any benfit for going there, please disprove this statement.
Don't try to spray glade air freshener on a pile of shit. WMD's aside, Saddam Hussein was a asshole of the highest calibur who's responsible for murdering his own people, using chemical weapons, oppressing the public opinion, harboring terrorist organizations, and violating just about every doctrine in the geneva convention that dictates "Come kick my ass before I do something worse" What we did was long overdue. The original justification that was used to go back to Iraq was crap, but by no means does that mean that Saddam Hussein was a nice guy and didn't deserve to get a MOAB enema. Do you know any Saudi nationals that were POW's from the first gulf war or Iraqis that were in the region during Saddams reign? Furthermore did you even bother to do any research into how much of the US' oil comes from the middle east? Until you can answer any of those questions with a 'yes' you're not worth arguing with. I'm not saying that I know everything there is, but I do know that you're turning a blind eye to some pretty serious issues for the greater good of liberal media.
-Mike V

[evildisco]

Don't try to spray glade air freshener on a pile of shit. WMD's aside, Saddam Hussein was a asshole of the highest calibur who's responsible for murdering his own people, using chemical weapons, oppressing the public opinion, harboring terrorist organizations, and violating just about every doctrine in the geneva convention that dictates "Come kick my ass before I do something worse" What we did was long overdue. The original justification that was used to go back to Iraq was crap, but by no means does that mean that Saddam Hussein was a nice guy and didn't deserve to get a MOAB enema. Do you know any Saudi nationals that were POW's from the first gulf war or Iraqis that were in the region during Saddams reign? Furthermore did you even bother to do any research into how much of the US' oil comes from the middle east? Until you can answer any of those questions with a 'yes' you're not worth arguing with. I'm not saying that I know everything there is, but I do know that you're turning a blind eye to some pretty serious issues for the greater good of liberal media.
-Mike V

You talk so lightly of the Geneva treaty, but why is no one entitled to say "Lets go kick some american ass since they have broken that treaty countless of times"?After all this country entertains the highest record of vaporizing people in a single day.

"Liberal media" thats one amusing word, anyways moving along.
Did you used to live in Iraq for stating all those things?, or did you just sheepishly get your info from maybe a couple of photos you've seen on Time magazine or something of sort.

On what grounds are you making a judgement?, by your statements you are putting your perception on a pedestal and applying as the standard for you to formulate as to wether something is "good" or "evil".
Did you know that women could drive and go about without having to be chaperoned in Iraq?,now compare that to Saudi Arabia.

[Drunken Monkey]

Well lets not forget Russia and China - they also meet all 14. Any superpower will.

[SJ Bennighof]

"Liberal media" thats one amusing word

Two words, actually. And I'm pretty sure he was talking about "media" in general that is liberal (like those videos), not the oft-debated concept of "the liberal media".

[evildisco]

No, what I found amusing was that "liberal" is defined not anymore as a progressist or something like that, but as "against us" without any specific connotations.

[SJ Bennighof]

Um, I always thought that "liberal" is merely a term that describes those people who wish to bring change to the political paradigm, and in today's world, indicative the Democratic party. If it has "against us" connotations, that's not the fault of those who use the word in the sense that Undertow was just then; it's still an accurate term for describing people and things of a Democratic nature.

[evildisco]

The democratic party in the US is not "liberal", its just moderate conservative.
The political perspective in this country is very skewed, there's no real liberal tradition in the political spheres.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Don't try to spray glade air freshener on a pile of shit. LMao well said :)
WMD's aside, Yes Yes do indeed sweep that to the side....the WHOLE ENTIRE reason the american public approved the decision to go to Iraq! Let's put that as far to the side as humanly possible.

Saddam Hussein was a asshole of the highest calibur who's responsible for murdering his own people, using chemical weapons, oppressing the public opinion, harboring terrorist organizations, and violating just about every doctrine in the geneva convention that dictates "Come kick my ass before I do something worse"

And there are soooooo many more like him, that have done even worse. Quit changing the reason why we went to war with Iraq when evidence proves our original motives wrong.

Furthermore did you even bother to do any research into how much of the US' oil comes from the middle east? Until you can answer any of those questions with a 'yes' you're not worth arguing with.
Two-thirds of the world's oil is in the Middle East. Though the US buys relatively little, an interdependent world economy means the Iraqi conflict could directly, and indirectly, hurt us.-PBS We import about 17 percent of our oil from the Middle east. How is that for an answer?

I'm not saying that I know everything there is, but I do know that you're turning a blind eye to some pretty serious issues for the greater good of liberal media.
-Mike V A blind eye....a blind eye????? We went to war for 1 express reason...that reason turned out to be FALSE sir. WMDS. Yet there are those who still support our actions in Iraq. When each passing month the war that would "take a few weeks to win" seems to have no end in sight. I believe this is our genrations Vietnam and we need to cut our losses before that analogy is made true.

The liberal media- thanks to phrases like that we have turned the once proud news organizations of this country into pansies. They are no longer determined to bring news to the forefront regardless of upsetting peoples beliefs or opinions.

[nil]

Don't try to spray glade air freshener on a pile of shit.

...

The original justification that was used to go back to Iraq was crap, but by no means does that mean that Saddam Hussein was a nice guy and didn't deserve to get a MOAB enema.
-Mike V

as you said, you cant polish a turd. don't be hypocritical.

edit: or, what the guy above me said

[SJ Bennighof]

The democratic party in the US is not "liberal", its just moderate conservative.
The political perspective in this country is very skewed, there's no real liberal tradition in the political spheres.

I was under the impression that Democrats generally are in favor or legalizing gay marriage, pushing affirmative action farther, putting fewer restrictions on abortions, etc, etc? I'm not saying anything abotu the issues themselves, but though would be liberal goals in the political sense of the word, right?

I know we're just arguing semantics, but what the hell. :hatsoff:

[Undertow]

as you said, you cant polish a turd. don't be hypocritical.

edit: or, what the guy above me said
and how exactly am I being hypocritical?
Quick question for you, and all others that want to bitch about this. What exactly is your complaint about us going into Iraq? Is it that we're losing lives? Is it money? What is the root cause of all your bitching or are you just bitching to bitch?

[Undertow]

Received this in an e-mail today that seems rather fitting given the subject matter.

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
January.....In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the
month of January. That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.

FDR...led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did.

From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman...finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never
attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.
John F. Kennedy. .started the Vietnam conflict in 1961. Vietnam never
attacked us.

Johnson...turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.
Clinton...went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia
never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to
destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick killing a woman.

Wait, there's more why military personnel do what they do for a living. This exchange between Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive impromptu speech, but it's also a good example of one man's explanation of why men and women in the armed services do what they do for a living. This is a typical, though sad, example of what some who have never served think of our military.

JOHN GLENN ON THE SENATE FLOOR Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13 Senator Howard Metzenbaum to Senator Glenn: "How can you run for Senate when you've never held a real job?"

Senator Glenn: "I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps. I
served through two wars. I flew 149 missions. My plane was hit by
anti-aircraft fire on 12 different occasions. I was in the space program.
It wasn't my checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the daily cash receipts
to the bank. I ask you to go with me .. as I went the other day... to a
veteran's hospital and look those men - with their mangled bodies - in
the eye, and tell THEM they didn't hold a job You go with me to the Space Program at NASA and go, as I have gone, to the widows and orphans of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee... and you look those kids in the
eye and tell them that their Dads didn't hold a job. You go with me on
Memorial Day and you stand in Arlington National Cemetery, where I have more friends buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch those waving flags. You stand there, and you think about this nation, and you tell ME that those people didn't have a job? I'll tell you, Howard Metzenbaum; you should
be on your knees every day of your life thanking God that there were some men - SOME MEN - who held REAL jobs. And they required a dedication to a purpose - and a love of country and a dedication to duty - that was more important than life itself. And their self-sacrifice is what made this country possible. I HAVE held a job, Howard! What about you?"

For those who don't remember - During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney representing the Communist Party in the USA.

[nil]

maybe hypocritical wasn't the right word, but you're trying to justify the war while just admitting that the reason for the war was crap: "The original reason we went to war was crap, but just listen to these justifications I can make after the fact!"

i never bitched. not to say i agree with what happened, but i never bitched about it. i'm just pointing out some inconsistencies.

however, if i were to bitch, it would be (primarily) because the war was entirely unfounded. IMO this was george's personal war, he used the "threat" of being attacked as an excuse for invading a country, killing many people (both foreign and his own), installing what he believes is the correct govermental model, and making a bunch of money for his pals in the process.

the reason given for this war was the threat of WMD. there is no evidence of them in iraq. therefore the war was unfounded. simple as that.

at best this war is a big mistake brought on by poor intelligence. at worst, it's imperiliastic invasion seeking wealth and power. you choose.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

I don't get what your point is Undertow? Is it "Our failure in Iraq is bad, but not as bad as these other instances"??? And after Janet Reno "took" the Branch Davidian Complex unlike Iraq there was no more conflict, it was over. Is it over in Iraq? No, so you can't really make that analogy dude.

Edit: Dammit Nil beat me to my point....:)

[otis]

I love how Andrew just starts one thread, and all hell breaks loose! Evil, Andrew, just plain EVIL. Good stuff. :devil:

[jetpack42]

We went to war for 1 express reason...that reason turned out to be FALSE sir. WMDS.

Last time I checked, we invaded Iraq because of unfulfilled UN resolutions on the part of Saddam. He was also given the option to leave the country and allow in weapons inspectors as an alternative. He was given two chances to avert the situation (by complying to begin with, or when our forces were on his borders). Of course, it sounds better if all the hysterical hippies scream in unison WELL WE NEVER FOUND ANY WEAPONS AND THATS WHY WE WENT TO WARRRRR BUSHSUCKSSSSS!!!

I'm not saying I agree with stuff, but keep your bullshit in your own bathroom.

[seb]

In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

i wish who ever wrote that didnt accidentally delete the paragraph that began - "Bush...went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan.... "


http://lunaville.com/wmd/billmon.aspx

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Last time I checked, we invaded Iraq because of unfulfilled UN resolutions on the part of Saddam.
Huh? Yes and those unfulfilled U.N. resolutions were given in the first place because we believed he was hiding weapons of mass destruction...?

He was also given the option to leave the country and allow in weapons inspectors as an alternative. And what were those weapon inspectors looking for? Here's a hint it isn't easter eggs. Okay and also thanks for agreeing with me in the exact same post...?

He was given two chances to avert the situation (by complying to begin with, or when our forces were on his borders). Of course, it sounds better if all the hysterical hippies scream in unison WELL WE NEVER FOUND ANY WEAPONS AND THATS WHY WE WENT TO WARRRRR
BUSHSUCKSSSSS!!!

Are you kidding me you were alive 2-3 years ago when there was a conference after conference telling them American public of Saddam's threat of WMDs. I mean you were alive when Colin Powell tesified before Congress of Iraq's WMD manufacturing capabilites and storage sites? And you surely do remember 9/11 the worst terrorist act ever comitted on U.S. soil? And how that event made America fearful of Saddam and his capability to commit a terrorist act with his WMDS???? PLease tell me you do????


I'm not saying I agree with stuff, but keep your bullshit in your own bathroom. You make a much better point when you are just posting animated gifs.

P.S. I love you-Semaj

[evildisco]

In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put
nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.


What an incredibly flat and superficial statement.
First, crippled al-Qaeda, far from the truth, all these wars are just coercing and making people have much stronger justifications to have "hatred" against the US.
The argument is very understandable, "Who are you to tell me what to do in my own country?" and not coming from some random psychotic dictator that you might want to cite, but the common folk.
If you ever read about Qadaffi, you want to know why the US hate him so much?Its because he nationalized the oil resources and employed them for the country's growth.
In the case of Iran and North Korea, can you explain me what has been averted exactly?
Nothing at all really, and you know why?Because the government has no further interests in those two countries.
Kim Il Jong is arguably crazier and more dangerous than Saddam ever was, how come there's no second war for Korea?
Think about that.

[jetpack42]

shit man, thats the problem with online debates. You have to rely on some person on the other end being able to comprehend what you write.

Yes, in shorthand we went to war because of WMDs. But, as you implied that we found nothing and therefore have discredited ourselves; finding them or not doesn't really justify the cause. The cause was that they COULD have them, based on EVIDENCE and NONCOMPLIANCE.

So feel free to blame Saddam as much as anybody else, if not more.

If we found storehouses of nuclear weapons, would hippies around the globe be singing a different tune? Not likely.

I don't agree with what Bush has done, but quit just repeating what the pothead next to you said.

Logic is a difficult monster, I know. Carry on.

[gasmask]

yes evildisco, you assume you know more than me even tho you dont know me and ur the same age as i am, thats pretty funny, yet you seem to base ur arguments about calling people ignorant and stupid like ur actually more knowlegable than them yet you have still not shown it, my suggestion is go draw some more anime

[evildisco]

Indeed gasmask, I'm not calling you ignorant thats the difference, you really are.
Read what you will I have backed my arguments, you instead, turn to attack the interlocutor.

Go shoot some rounds on the cans on your fence, cowboy.

[gasmask]

lol whatever you say man

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Gentlemen, Gentlemen....lets all take a breather.

[troymcoy]

gasmask, how about you prove your theories such as how people in the middle east have been "living in dirt since the beginning of time", instead of calling evildisco names. maybe it's because you know you're wrong?

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Okay and now that we have all taken a breather, lets get back to the childish insults and accusations :) shit man, thats the problem with online debates. You have to rely on some person on the other end being able to comprehend what you write. Yes I know exactly how you feel, it's as though I am talking to a child sometimes who can only argue through insults.

Yes, in shorthand we went to war because of WMDs. Getting closer.... But, as you implied that we found nothing and therefore have discredited ourselves; finding them or not doesn't really justify the cause. The cause was that they COULD have them, based on EVIDENCE and NONCOMPLIANCE. Awwh shucks and you lost it, you were so close....Anyway that makes perfect sense how not finding the evidence for the one defining reason for a thousand people to lose their lives justificates just as well as not finding the evidence. How could I have been so blind not to comprehend that profound statement. EVIDENCE-that turned out to be false. NONCOMPLIANCE-We already had weapon inspectors in Iraq, who testified that they found nothing.

So feel free to blame Saddam as much as anybody else, if not more. Saddam ...I blame Bush and his cabinet.

If we found storehouses of nuclear weapons, would hippies around the globe be singing a different tune? Not likely. I don't agree with what Bush has done, but quit just repeating what the pothead next to you said. You are right they wouldn't because who the hell is a hippie or uses the term "hippie" LMAO...maybe you should quit repeating what your out-of-touch-with-the-world father keeps telling you...?



Logic is a difficult monster, I know. Carry on. And that monster is obviously scaring the shit out of you, because you seem to be anything but logics friend.

P.S. I still love you.

I Ssenkrah Semaj do hereby apologize for the above retort but I had to answer with the same vocabulary.

[gasmask]

i never called him names, hes the one name calling, and my point is, those people have always been fighting, mainly the conflict thats been going on forever with the jews, now when i said they have been living in a dirt i obviosuly dont mean literally, dont get me wrong, their are some nice places in the mid east but for the most part its still a 3rd world country like saudi arabia. i was only saying that based on a previous post that made it sound like the US made it that way

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

i never called him names, hes the one name calling, and my point is, those people have always been fighting,

I wonder what other country/people that we know of which has always been involved in a major conflict....hmmmmmmmmm? On the tip of my tongue......

[evildisco]

"Mommy he's calling me namessss!He's meaaaan!!!"
:stfu:

[nil]

shit man, thats the problem with online debates. You have to rely on some person on the other end being able to comprehend what you write.

Yes, in shorthand we went to war because of WMDs. But, as you implied that we found nothing and therefore have discredited ourselves; finding them or not doesn't really justify the cause. The cause was that they COULD have them, based on EVIDENCE and NONCOMPLIANCE.

So feel free to blame Saddam as much as anybody else, if not more.

If we found storehouses of nuclear weapons, would hippies around the globe be singing a different tune? Not likely.

I don't agree with what Bush has done, but quit just repeating what the pothead next to you said.

Logic is a difficult monster, I know. Carry on.

im not sure if this is directed at me or not. if it was, i certainly don't appreciate being implicated as a 'pothead'. what i might choose to put into my own body has little to do with this discussion. not that you know me at all, or have any EVIDENCE to base your opinion on.

as i said, at best this war is a big mistake brought on by poor intelligence. "poor intelligence" might be replaced by the phrase "false or misleading EVIDENCE"

you ever heard of this guy, "Bigfoot"? seems there have been photographs of the fellow running around out in the forest. eye-witness reports, footprints, that kinda thing. you know, EVIDENCE. i say we invade the forest, destroy whatever stands in our way, and capture him. he WILL be there. we know this. we have evidence.

and after we've barged in, killed a few things and set a few fires, if he's not there after all? well, that's just ok, cause he COULD have been.

the american government was WRONG. they proved themselves to be incompetent, and that incompetence cost many human lives, including many of the lives they are supposed to protect (i.e., US citizens). i just don't get how anyone can be defending them.

[gasmask]

evil id watch your mouth, i wouldnt talk shit to someone you dont know especially if we were to bump into each other at a workshop or something, have a little respect

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Gasmask come on dude, we have different opinions but we can express them more politely (i'm not one to talk)....you too evil.

Let's try to get back on track with providing our views and opinions in a polite and respectful manner.

NIL...he was probably talking to me and well put example dude.

Edit: Yeah and I can't wait to read Jetpacks response to mine lol.

[evildisco]

Likewise, likewise dear gasmask.
If you think that makes me feel threatened I hope we "bump" into each other as you say.
And with this I'm done arguing.

[nil]

semaj: yeah, well, he shouldn't be insulting you either :) (edit again: and thanks!)

edit: also, it's great to watch the "who's reading this thread" thingee. Hi guys! :overhere:

[N D Hill]

Houston, we have a flamewar.

[gasmask]

lol im not trying to threaten, i got nothing but love for the art community but cmon, i get sick of the rudeness on here sometimes, it seems we get more and more of these arguments lately.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

I love you Gasmask (plutonic way) even if you do say things that sound harsher than you mean.

[jetpack42]

nil, I know you like to get offended easily and try and put people in thier place, but I was talking to Semaj.

I'm not defending the American government. I'm merely calling out people talking out of their ass. It's simple for everyone to run around being an anarchist, but it's difficult to propose a better working solution. Most of the people can't even explain why they think what they think.

But if it makes any of you feel any better, type how much Americans, thier government, and Bush suck a few more times. I don't care what you think.

We've got alot of Armchair Generals in this forum.

edit: Furthermore, by my own admission, I am far from an expert on the issue of the Middle East and this entire situation, but I DO know the issue is alot deeper then 'Bush is the Devil, terrorists, oil, and WMDS!!~!~!"

[evildisco]

Politics are evil.

[nil]

jetpack: that's fine, as i said, i wasn't sure if that was directed at me..it's not that i get easily offended, trust me, im not all hurt and saddened by your terrible slander against my good name :rolleyes:
and for the record, i don't think americans suck merely due to being american. that would be stupid. i feel the same basic indifference for everyone, unless they do something to change my mind.

[Helium Macaroni]

Bush sucks.. and this government sucks..

..Americans? Well, we did create fried dough. That counts for something.

[LaPalida]

yes evildisco, you assume you know more than me even tho you dont know me and ur the same age as i am

How exactly does age determine intelligence?

now when i said they have been living in a dirt i obviosuly dont mean literally, dont get me wrong, their are some nice places in the mid east but for the most part its still a 3rd world country like saudi arabia. i was only saying that based on a previous post that made it sound like the US made it that way

We know what you meant. Nice try at a definitional retreat there.

A definitional retreat takes place when someone changes the meaning of the words in order to deal with an objection raised against the original wording. By changing the meaning, he turns it into a different statement. Words are used with conventional meanings. If we are allowed to deal with objections to what we say by claiming that they mean something totally unusual, rational discourse breaks down altogether.

Some places? You mean like Baghdad? That's a nice place... was. So tell us who were you referring to when you said "those people have been living in dirt since the beginning of time". Iranians? Syrians? Turks? Who would you be referring to?

Saudi Arabia 3rd world? Lets take a look at the figures:
-GDP: purchasing power parity - $287.8 billion (2003 est.)
-Economic Aid Donor: pledged $100 million in 1993 to fund reconstruction of Lebanon; since 2000, Saudi Arabia has committed $307 million for assistance to the Palestinians; pledged $240 million to development in Afghanistan; pledged $1 billion in export guarantees and soft loans to Iraq
-Life Expectancy at birth:
total population: 75.23 years
male: 73.26 years
female: 77.3 years (2004 est.)
-Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 78.8%
male: 84.7%
female: 70.8% (2003 est.)

Lets compare to USA:
-GDP: purchasing power parity - $10.99 trillion (2003 est.)
-Economic Aid Donor: ODA, $6.9 billion (1997)
-Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 77.43 years
male: 74.63 years
female: 80.36 years (2004 est.)
-Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 97%
male: 97%
female: 97% (1999 est.)

And Somalia (a real 3rd world):
-GDP: purchasing power parity - $4.361 billion (2003 est.)
-Economic Aid Recipient: $60 million (1999 est.)
-Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 47.71 years
male: 46.02 years
female: 49.46 years (2004 est.)
-Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 37.8%
male: 49.7%
female: 25.8% (2001 est.)

EDIT: forgot the reference link http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/

[Mindflaw]

Ok I've only had have the time to skim through the thread since my last post,read tomorrow, but anyway.

Wheter you are against that USA started a war in Iraq or not...the main issue is now: How is USA dealing with the current situation? And how are they going to deal with the situation in the time to come.

No matter if the reason was oil or not... USA will gain on a stable situation in Iraq no matter if the reason is humanitarian or to gain a safe access to oil or whatever. The main issue now is how are USA going to interact with Iraq and with the countries in the entire middle east region and other countries involved to create a stable situation?

We do not know how it will all end since it is still an ongoing event.

as my own personal view I'm against that USA started the war and I also think that the main reason was economical. But now they did start the war and what we actually should spend our energy is to discuss how to make things head for the right directionsl, since I hope we all want it to end well.

I know how is our discussion going to do any change... there was a lot of people in the entire world including a lot of americans who protested and demonstrated against the war without success and bla bla etc but heh anyway why are we posting in this thread at all if that should be the case?

[oracrest]

How exactly does age determine intelligence?



We know what you meant. Nice try at a definitional retreat there.

A definitional retreat takes place when someone changes the meaning of the words in order to deal with an objection raised against the original wording. By changing the meaning, he turns it into a different statement. Words are used with conventional meanings. If we are allowed to deal with objections to what we say by claiming that they mean something totally unusual, rational discourse breaks down altogether.

Some places? You mean like Baghdad? That's a nice place... was. So tell us who were you referring to when you said "those people have been living in dirt since the beginning of time". Iranians? Syrians? Turks? Who would you be referring to?

Saudi Arabia 3rd world? Lets take a look at the figures:
-GDP: purchasing power parity - $287.8 billion (2003 est.)
-Economic Aid Donor: pledged $100 million in 1993 to fund reconstruction of Lebanon; since 2000, Saudi Arabia has committed $307 million for assistance to the Palestinians; pledged $240 million to development in Afghanistan; pledged $1 billion in export guarantees and soft loans to Iraq
-Life Expectancy at birth:
total population: 75.23 years
male: 73.26 years
female: 77.3 years (2004 est.)
-Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 78.8%
male: 84.7%
female: 70.8% (2003 est.)

Lets compare to USA:
-GDP: purchasing power parity - $10.99 trillion (2003 est.)
-Economic Aid Donor: ODA, $6.9 billion (1997)
-Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 77.43 years
male: 74.63 years
female: 80.36 years (2004 est.)
-Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 97%
male: 97%
female: 97% (1999 est.)

And Somalia (a real 3rd world):
-GDP: purchasing power parity - $4.361 billion (2003 est.)
-Economic Aid Recipient: $60 million (1999 est.)
-Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 47.71 years
male: 46.02 years
female: 49.46 years (2004 est.)
-Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 37.8%
male: 49.7%
female: 25.8% (2001 est.)

hey, when you guys post stuff like this, would you mind posting your source too? That would make for better reading. Oh, and if your source is some sort of spammed email, well.............yeah.

[SJ Bennighof]

Hooray for LaPalida! Gotta love them facts. :perv:

[HugeHarHar]

I have a quick question. And I'm writing this one completly neutral. I just want to know what you guys think.

How could the U.S. stop being considered Fascist? And I would like a real answer, a "kill Bush" would be dissapointing.

Pull the troops out of Iraq, South Korea, and every where else we are?
Shut down all the major corporations.

Those two things seem to be the biggest problems everyone has with the U.S. I know that both of them are big problems, but if these problems we're "solved", think of the incredable consequences.

If every single troop from every where on the planet just pulled back to the U.S. then think about how many of those places would be in much more trouble. Iraq would return to being under a tyant. South Korea would then become Korea, or possibly S. Korea and Japan both get destroyed.

All the major corporations being shut down? First how many people would be jobless? Just a few I'd say. What then about allocating food, clothes, and well everything else? Prices would soar, and the amount available would be quite diminished.

Any suggestions? This whole thread has been complaints about the U.S. but no one has said any way of fixing such problems, regarldess of the fact that it won't change anyways, if you can give me a good enough solution, that would work, not just a theoretical solution, then I'll stop and give you the thumbs up. I would love to have hope for the future.

[Forge]

can somebody give me a good definition for "screw" please ?

i want to know what this guy want to play with me !

[LaPalida]

Doh! I usuallly put the links in. I knew I forgot something (had to kinda wrap up my post, my boss was closing the door lol). Anyway I got the figures from http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ it's a great way to find out anything you want about a country. US has the best intelligence :)

[glikster]

I love you Gasmask (plutonic way) even if you do say things that sound harsher than you mean.
since everyone else is being contrary I feel a moral obligation to tell you that the word you were looking for is "platonic". You may all now go about your business - the Spelling Nazi has spoken.

[LaPalida]

Dude you should do that more often. My fingers are always itchy to correct people around here for their misuse of words. It's seriously funny. I know what they mean but sometimes stuff like "Achilles heal", comon... if you know how to spell "Achilles" how hard is it to spell "heel" properly?

[glikster]

well, usually I would think it's rude, but that isn't that much of an issue in this thread, now is it?

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

since everyone else is being contrary I feel a moral obligation to tell you that the word you were looking for is "platonic". You may all now go about your business - the Spelling Nazi has spoken.

Out of all the grammatical and spelling errors on just this page alone...you single me out???? I pride myself on my ability to spell and speak grammatically correct. It was obviously a typo, I am close to perfect! :bashful: arrrrrggghhhh

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

I know what they mean but sometimes stuff like "Achilles heal", comon... if you know how to spell "Achilles" how hard is it to spell "heel" properly?


The same could be said for "comon" it is spelled come on.

I love you-Semaj

[glikster]

Out of all the grammatical and spelling errors on just this page alone...you single me out???? I pride myself on my ability to spell and speak grammatically correct. It was obviously a typo, I am close to perfect! :bashful: arrrrrggghhhh
I'll be honest, I wasn't paying attention to anyone.... it was your unexpected declaration of love in this festering, pussy scab of hatred that caught my eye.

And I'm lazy, so sue me.

[evildisco]

I have a quick question. And I'm writing this one completly neutral. I just want to know what you guys think.

How could the U.S. stop being considered Fascist? And I would like a real answer, a "kill Bush" would be dissapointing.


Implement some socialism into the political system.
Stronger labour unions, rights for workers assured, fiscal and legislative restrictions and accountability over super-corporations.
Health care paid fully by the government like in any other decent 1st world country.

And last but not least, REAL separation of church and state.

[glikster]

Implement some socialism into the political system.
sorry... as a rule I don't do this.... but I work for the SOCIAL Security Administration. I'll bugger off now.....

[EvilMidnightBomber]

Implement some socialism into the political system.

Socialism..On what level and degree, I'm curious to know? As it stands I do not favor any socialism on any degree, it is an ideal that never works, in my humble opinion.

[evildisco]

Read above I edited my post.

[SJ Bennighof]

Implement some socialism into the political system.
Stronger labour unions, rights for workers assured, fiscal and legislative restrictions and accountability over super-corporations.
Health care paid fully by the government like in any other decent 1st world country.

I thought that privatized health care was merely an aspect of capitalism.

And last but not least, REAL separation of church and state.

How are they not seperate now?

[evildisco]

They are not really separate by the mere fact that the people in charge are making moral judgements on the basis of religion.
And about the healthcare, Europe has a socialist tradition, the US doesn't ;even if the main system is capitalism, there are some things that have a socialist background.
For crying out loud even Italy, which is the single most petty bureaucratic country in the world has free health care paid by the government...

[oracrest]

I have a quick question. And I'm writing this one completly neutral. I just want to know what you guys think.

How could the U.S. stop being considered Fascist? And I would like a real answer, a "kill Bush" would be dissapointing.

Pull the troops out of Iraq, South Korea, and every where else we are?
Shut down all the major corporations.

Those two things seem to be the biggest problems everyone has with the U.S. I know that both of them are big problems, but if these problems we're "solved", think of the incredable consequences.

If every single troop from every where on the planet just pulled back to the U.S. then think about how many of those places would be in much more trouble. Iraq would return to being under a tyant. South Korea would then become Korea, or possibly S. Korea and Japan both get destroyed.

All the major corporations being shut down? First how many people would be jobless? Just a few I'd say. What then about allocating food, clothes, and well everything else? Prices would soar, and the amount available would be quite diminished.

Any suggestions? This whole thread has been complaints about the U.S. but no one has said any way of fixing such problems, regarldess of the fact that it won't change anyways, if you can give me a good enough solution, that would work, not just a theoretical solution, then I'll stop and give you the thumbs up. I would love to have hope for the future.

Hey huge Har Har. Im throwing my two cents here cause this is the only constructive post I have read on here so far. I merely want to clarify the two problems listed as I see them. I odn't think people necessarily want to end all military activity outside the US, and shut down corporations, but rather, feel more comfortable with our military forces in the sense that we feel the reasons for their actions aren't questionable. I would say, as I feel is an objective point, that the justifications for what we are doing with our military are definetly questionable at the moment. for the corporations; it is simply the level of power that they can have right now. With so much money, the legal system in their favor, they are in a real position of power when they reach a certain point. I think when people question corporations, it is really the corruption of the people within them. the framers never envisioned such concentrations of power and money when they drafted our laws. The areas that breed corruption they sought to keep in check by placing another opposing factor. the senate, supreme court, house of representatives, president, all had very powerful say within the government as a whole, but were also distributed powers in a way that kept any one from becoming too strong. Corporations only "opposing factor" is a competing business. Even laws themselves are just business decisions for corporations. the quote from fight club pretty much sums up the idea, (If X is less then the cost of a recall, we don't do one.)

I would put money down that if the constitution were written today it would include something about the corporate business structure, and seek to apply limitations on it's power, and it's small amount of legal immunity (reffering to it's existance as a living person in our current laws.)
heres a link i found on google talking a little more in depth about corporate identity in America, for any interested
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030919.html

I would recommend checking out some Noam Chomsky for any people out there interested in this kind of stuff. he is a professor of linguistics at MIT, and has many lectures and books on American Politics and our government and social atmoshpere. Here is VERY educated on the matter, and reasonable on what he is talking about. Its none of that political flame spewing crap you get with Anne Coulter or Michael Moore.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Implement some socialism into the political system.
Stronger labour unions, rights for workers assured, fiscal and legislative restrictions and accountability over super-corporations.
Health care paid fully by the government like in any other decent 1st world country.

And last but not least, REAL separation of church and state.

I agree with most of that except for the health care paid in full. Don't get me wrong health care paid by the government is a great idea, but if we were to do that we would no longer have the best doctors in the world. There would no longer be the incentive as there is now for the best doctors to come to the U.S.. Doctors would no longer study and practice in America , if they would make a substantial amount less than they would being paid by the government.

[evildisco]

Uhm that reasoning you just made is a phallacy, France's health care is free and it is rated as one of the best in the world.
So that does not apply what you just said.

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Uhm that reasoning you just made is a phallacy, France's health care is free and it is rated as one of the best in the world.
So that does not apply to what you just said.

Well someone posed that idea to me once and I thought it made sense....I was wrong. Gotta stop listening to the potheads next to me. Also free healthcare for everyone would save so many lives.

[oracrest]

Well someone posed that idea to me once and I thought it made sense....I was wrong. Gotta stop listening to the potheads next to me. Also free healthcare for everyone would save so many lives.

hey man, I just wanna say it's awesome that you admitted defeat on a point, and conceeded that you were wrong, that kind of thing is commendable in political discussion. It also shows a good level of intelligence.:)

[LaPalida]

The same could be said for "comon" it is spelled come on.

haha touche.

I will however point out the difference between mispelling, typos, slang and misuse of words. I don't mind so much spelling or typos (after all CA/internet is international and who knows maybe that person doesn't even speak English as a first language, or you typed too fast (teh, adn etc)) nor do I mind slang/webisms <-is that a word? (dunno, whodunnit, ain't, etc) but when you spell another word completely in the place of another word... that just shows that you don't know what you're talking about.

Socialism..On what level and degree, I'm curious to know? As it stands I do not favor any socialism on any degree, it is an ideal that never works, in my humble opinion.

Isn't there socialism in Sweden and Norway (some of the best countries to live in if you speak the language). Feel free to correct me.

[LaPalida]

I agree with most of that except for the health care paid in full. Don't get me wrong health care paid by the government is a great idea, but if we were to do that we would no longer have the best doctors in the world. There would no longer be the incentive as there is now for the best doctors to come to the U.S.. Doctors would no longer study and practice in America , if they would make a substantial amount less than they would being paid by the government.

That's very sad. If one goes on to become a doctor one isn't in it for the money but to save peoples lives. And anyway how much money does one really need to live well? If one gets paid 100 k here in Canada and 300 k in US for the same thing it would only be greediness that would make one move to US (which is exactly what's happening - my figures are probably wrong but the fact that they are moving isn't). Instead of staying here to help the people that are in need, they go over to US (where all the doctors are at anyway) and cash in on other peoples suffering.

[cuzzo]

This country was founded on lies and hypocrisy... just for the record.

Slavery was the religion of this country and it was used to kick-start the Industrial Revolution and create this facist nation.

If it was founded on religious ideals, then it would have been founded on honesty and not the destruction of Native Americans and Africans and so many other nations around the world.

These actions are not reflective of Jesus, Buddha, or any other spiritual leader... and to call it otherwise is to be fooled by the biggest dupe of the millenium. :dur:

[EvilMidnightBomber]

Preach Brother! Kill Whitie!

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

This country was founded on lies and hypocrisy... just for the record.

Slavery was the religion of this country and it was used to kick-start the Industrial Revolution and create this facist nation.

If it was founded on religious ideals, then it would have been founded on honesty and not the destruction of Native Americans and Africans and so many other nations around the world.

These actions are not reflective of Jesus, Buddha, or any other spiritual leader... and to call it otherwise is to be fooled by the biggest dupe of the millenium. :dur:

Here we go....

Religion is a lie in itself, so how could it invoke anything but more lies? Every single religion that is now considered myth was once believed to be fact, in time that will come true with the world's current superstitions.

Neither Jesus nor the apostles made the emancipation of slaves an issue in their ministry. Jesus healed the slave of a Roman centurion and spoke approvingly of the officer's faith, but He did not rebuke him for being a slaveowner (Lk. 7:1-10). He referred to the relationship of slaves and their masters in His parables, but He said nothing that indicated He disapproved of slavery (Mt. 18:21-35; Lk. 12:42-48). I can quote more scripture if you would like? I was once a devout christian.

[SJ Bennighof]

That's very sad. If one goes on to become a doctor one isn't in it for the money but to save peoples lives.

That's idealism. People aren't as nice as you think. Sure, people tend to do what they think their calling in life is, but just because someone decides to be a doctor doesn't mean they'll work better if it doesn't make any difference in their pay. If you're paid a flat fee by the government, you don't have to push yourself, usually people don't. You know those areas of the US that have private EMS services? Those services are blindingly efficient compared to the government-funded services that had been there. Why? Because if those guys mess up, they not only the patient but also their jobs. Just because someone's life is at stake doesn't mean people will push themselves. I don't like it either, but it's just how people are.

And anyway how much money does one really need to live well? If one gets paid 100 k here in Canada and 300 k in US for the same thing it would only be greediness that would make one move to US (which is exactly what's happening - my figures are probably wrong but the fact that they are moving isn't).

What people "need"? Capitalism isn't about what people "need". It's about what people are willing to work to earn. If it's greedy, it's greedy. I'd take the possibility of greed over a lack of motivation any day.

Instead of staying here to help the people that are in need, they go over to US (where all the doctors are at anyway) and cash in on other peoples suffering.

The reason medical fees are so high in the US is to cover malpractice insurance. If restrictions on frivolous lawsuits were tightened, doctors wouldn't have to pay as much and they'd be able to charge less. And they would charge less.

[jetpack42]

They are not really separate by the mere fact that the people in charge are making moral judgements on the basis of religion.

sorry to burst your bubble, but thats not what "Seperation of church and state" means. It means government sponsors no religions. Last time I checked, our government wasn't sponsoring any religions over the others. Leaders are allowed to have religious beliefs, and to act on them. If you don't like them, don't vote them in. If I had a nickel for everyone who complained about this and had no clue what they were talking about...

Don't believe me? Read the first amendment for yourself.

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/funddocs/billeng.htm

[LaPalida]

That's idealism. People aren't as nice as you think. Sure, people tend to do what they think their calling in life is, but just because someone decides to be a doctor doesn't mean they'll work better if it doesn't make any difference in their pay. If you're paid a flat fee by the government, you don't have to push yourself, usually people don't. You know those areas of the US that have private EMS services? Those services are blindingly efficient compared to the government-funded services that had been there. Why? Because if those guys mess up, they not only the patient but also their jobs. Just because someone's life is at stake doesn't mean people will push themselves. I don't like it either, but it's just how people are.

You're right it is. When I said it I meant that's the way it should be. I know people aren't all nice. The point I was trying to make is that capitalism is bad for morality, humanity, and the environment. Some doctors should seriously take a look at themselves. See what motivates them. If it's money then you can be certain that morality goes out of the window. If you want to become a doctor your motive should be to help people not rake in money. If you get paid by the government and don't push yourself then you know for sure that you're not in the profession for the betterment of humanity. This sort of attitude does not create any kind of love.

What people "need"? Capitalism isn't about what people "need". It's about what people are willing to work to earn. If it's greedy, it's greedy. I'd take the possibility of greed over a lack of motivation any day.

That's why I think capitalism is rotten. We are talking about reshaping a country to socialism right? I think greed is what drives capitalism. I wouldn't take the word greed so lightly. I don't think a single person/few people should have incredible control over vast resources. It isn't right. There is a limited amount of resources available and if one rakes in everything that leaves many without anything at all.

The reason medical fees are so high in the US is to cover malpractice insurance. If restrictions on frivolous lawsuits were tightened, doctors wouldn't have to pay as much and they'd be able to charge less. And they would charge less.

They would? Why would they?

[endregan]

Barbeque Sauce.....

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

That's why I think capitalism is rotten. We are talking about reshaping a country to socialism right? I think greed is what drives capitalism. I wouldn't take the word greed so lightly. I don't think a single person/few people should have incredible control over vast resources. It isn't right. There is a limited amount of resources available and if one rakes in everything that leaves many without anything at all.

Look at the examples we have of complete working socialism, the government has all the resources, controls it, redistributes it, and the people have a drastic amount less than we do. That isn't it right.

[HugeHarHar]

oracrest - Thanks man, this thread has no become a grammer and spelling war thread. I'm glad though you we're willing to pitch in. Really you wrote how I feel about the how deal.

I look at the recent prisoner's torture thing, with them being naked and such, and it does bother me that it happens, but I also believe it's more of an individual problem, just those people involved. But I'm also extremmly bothered by what the U.S. prisoners, and them beheaded. That actually horrifies me. Right now, I personally believe the war is corrupting the people more then the war itself being corrupt.

Basically the only true plan I could think of when dealing with the corporations, would be to encourage more companies, maybe government funded, highly doubtful, to compete with the existing ones, very simple idea but would greatly lessen there power.

[LaPalida]

Hmm what examples?

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Communist Russia, China, and Cuba.

[endregan]

Well hear this concept out. We as artists form a country, first a small island or little piece of land and eventually expand from there.

Whose with me ?

[Ssenkrah Semaj]

Best idea I have ever heard Endregan! I got first dibs on Lapilda to help populate the island! :teeth:

[brokk]

http://www.theamericans.us/Americans-chauvinism.html

That is all I have to say.

After reading nearly all this, I'm very sad, really. I feel pretty bad at the responses this thread has gotten.

I will create a new thread with the link stated.

Peace.

[Mindflaw]

[---] but when you spell another word completely in the place of another word... that just shows that you don't know what you're talking about.


LaPalida please read what I have to say...The first thing is that e.g swedish grammar is very different from english grammar I will give you couple of examples of this.... the sentence: A tall long-haired nurse...(I think long-haired is used about animals and not about humans... if that the case sorry) in swedish: En långhårig sjuksköterska. If I use english grammar it becomes in swedish: En lång hårig sjuk syster. This translated into english becomes: A tall hairy sick sister. This happened cause the english grammar was merged with swedish words. If I would use swedish grammar when writing: the united states of America it would turn out Americas united states. Then we have other translation problems... like if I were to translate the swedish word reservoirpenna by using words that means the same thing as the swedish word it would turn out reservoirepen or cinisterpen and not fountain pen. If I would translate stålpenna it would turn out steelpen and not steel nib . So please don't judge me stupid or ignorant just because of grammatical errors! It could be that I'm thinking a tall long-haired nurse but it comes out a tall hairy sick sister. I feel sorry for people who rely on programs like babel fish.

Also words that are neutral in swedish might be negative in english etc.

This are some of the reason why I have writtten in my signature : Ps:Hope you understand my English. I try to write correct and it does take me a long time. But if what I'm writing turns out gibberish please ask me what I mean instead of judging me clueless.

Edit: about steel nib (as it's written in my swedish-english dictionary)... I have been writing nib pen is that correct too???

[EvilMidnightBomber]

You have brought up some very interesting points Mindflaw. No one thinks ur stupid dude.

[LaPalida]

Mindflaw. I apologize if I did judge you but I was not referring to you when I said

I will however point out the difference between mispelling, typos, slang and misuse of words. I don't mind so much spelling or typos (after all CA/internet is international and who knows maybe that person doesn't even speak English as a first language, or you typed too fast (teh, adn etc)) nor do I mind slang/webisms <-is that a word? (dunno, whodunnit, ain't, etc) but when you spell another word completely in the place of another word... that just shows that you don't know what you're talking about.

I did mention that I know that people that post here, their first language is not English and I understand that. That's why I refrain from commenting on their grammar or what not. The only reason I mentioned it is that I notice some people from US (and here I can be wrong too since they might have migrated to US from elsewhere) make those mistakes.

[magicgoo]

I didn't read everything, just because I hate political rants, but here's a politically sound rant of my own.

I just wanted to add my two cents about the flash animation itself:

1. It keeps showing Pres. Bush as if it's directed at him. Then it shows (contradicting) footage of wars that occured before Bush was even out of diapers. Lame.

2. The animation states that a fascist government is powerful and I'd like to know what government isn't powerful? It's called government for a reason. It governs. If we didn't have a powerful government, then our country would be taken over by a true tyrranical leader. And as much as everyone wants to compare Bush to a tyrrant, well, sorry. He isn't. He's a figurehead who cannot make decisions without first consulting Congress. (See my point 3 below.) Anyhow, if we didn't have a powerful government, then we would all have guns to our heads from some dictator's minions, and people would REALLY hate America then for not giving them proper protection.

3. In basic Political Science 101, we can learn that the president is merely a glorified Administrator. All decisions must pass through Congress, which consists of 535 members. Congress is split into the House of Reps and the Senate. Each of those is powered by about 50% Democratic reps and 50% Republican reps. So, no matter if we have a Democrat or Republican in the seat of the President, the decisions made are always gonna be about the same. 535 people OTHER than the president are making these decisions for the better of the nation, not for the better of some internet dork ranting about fascism.

It's quite a futile argument to use Bush as a scapegoat for every single problem or call America's government fascist. Remember when black people couldn't vote a couple hundred years ago? Remember when women couldn't have jobs? Remember when people could own slaves? Remember when people were burned alive for their beliefs? We've come A HELL OF A LOOOOONG WAY since those times, and this dumbass who made this flash animation could have never had half the opportunities he's had if he had been born in those times. He should thank his god that he wasn't a Jew in Germany, being raped daily by soldiers and suffering torturous genetic experimentation.

It's really easy for him to sit in his mom's air conditioned house in front of his 20" monitor, whining about government idealogies when he has soooo much freedom that he's never suffered true fascism in his life.

I do not take the term "fascism" lightly, and neither should the spoiled morons who have it soooo good, that they have to invent problems to complain about.

OK, I'm done. :[ Back to happy art time fun talk.

[evildisco]

sorry to burst your bubble, but thats not what "Seperation of church and state" means. It means government sponsors no religions. Last time I checked, our government wasn't sponsoring any religions over the others. Leaders are allowed to have religious beliefs, and to act on them. If you don't like them, don't vote them in. If I had a nickel for everyone who complained about this and had no clue what they were talking about...

Don't believe me? Read the first amendment for yourself.

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/funddocs/billeng.htm

Nononono, "Freedom of religion" is one thing, "separation of church and state" is another.
You see my problem with it, is that if you have a religion based moral judgement, you have to imply that its based on faith and belief, now I find abherrant that someone in charge employs those two to make decisions.
Reason is what should be employed not the latter.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

And if you had read any better, "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" meaning that no law shall be passed on religious criteria, but obviously I have no clue do I?
And you will point out the other way to read that quote, but since its vague at most I have a point made thats legitimate.

[Mindflaw]

LaPalida: No Problems, unfortunately what you thought did not show (at least to me). You wrote I will however point out the difference between mispelling, typos, slang and misuse of words. I don't mind so much spelling or typos (after all CA/internet is international and who knows maybe that person doesn't even speak English as a first language, or you typed too fast (teh, adn etc)) nor do I mind slang/webisms <-is that a word? (dunno, whodunnit, ain't, etc)
all this you accepted then you wrote
but when you spell another word completely in the place of another word... that just shows that you don't know what you're talking about.
I hope you understand why I missunderstood you... since you didn't write that the latter part only meant those with english as first language.

And don't refrain to comment me if I have bad grammar, since I want to learn how to write better. But I know what you mean, most people comments on grammar etc is not to help. Anyway as I wrote in the beginnning no problems I understand you now :)


PS: And I still want to know if nib pen is correct or should I write steel nib... The question was not sarcasm it was and is a serious question. :bashful:

[LaPalida]

It's cool. Guess I wrote too ambiguously. Oh well. I guess my writing skillz aren't what they used to be heh. Sorry bout that.

I think you can safely say a steel pen nib. I don't think it matters really, they both sound like they are referring to a pen so I don't see a problem. You can say pen nib or steel nib, either way I don't think people will think you're talking about birds. (nib refers to a bird's beak sometimes)

[SJ Bennighof]

You're right it is. When I said it I meant that's the way it should be. I know people aren't all nice. The point I was trying to make is that capitalism is bad for morality, humanity, and the environment. Some doctors should seriously take a look at themselves. See what motivates them. If it's money then you can be certain that morality goes out of the window. If you want to become a doctor your motive should be to help people not rake in money. If you get paid by the government and don't push yourself then you know for sure that you're not in the profession for the betterment of humanity. This sort of attitude does not create any kind of love.

Attitudes don't create love, LaPalida, people do. (sparkles and rainbows appear) No seriously, love will appear in any kind of environment. I would probably say that both goodwill and money drive most doctors. It's a combination of both. Take the extra money away and that's just one less thing driving a person. I don't want goodwill to be forced on me as the only thing driving me in an economic system. It's when people have the hoice of greed or goodwill or a combination of both that people show their true colors. We as artists like to portray something as accurately as possible, right? So why have a society that makes things look rosier than they are?

That's why I think capitalism is rotten. We are talking about reshaping a country to socialism right?

Oh, my mistake. I didn't know that was what the conversation was about.


They would? Why would they?

Competition. If a seller can offer less and does, all of the other sellers that can offer less ill have to follow suit or lose customers. Doctors don't have some kind of cartel set up, they want to please the people they work with.

[Jason Manley]

every one of you in this thread better have posted a crit. I dont want to start banning people who dont contribute positively to this art community. GIVE.


when the first negative words were posted this thread should have been closed. I am going to do so now before any other tempers flare.

if you want to express yourself politically on this website then do so artistically...put some art in the politics.

you all wasted too much time in here already. back to work yo.


J