The America Issue

Dont trust an "-ism" thats what i say

To be honest democracy doesnt work....why should a guy become ruler if only 51% of the people think he should? Half the country might as well not have a say because what they wanted didnt happen.
 
I would like to point out that Democratically elected governments are not holy of holies.... The Nazis essentially came into power that way (don't try and argue... I spent two years studying the cause and effect :p)... Oh yeah, and Communism will never work (despite me being Comrade Badger :p )... (only Stalinism :E) due to basic human nature.
 
well, in Star trek communism worked...you can try and force democracy on a people (like the germans after WWII), but that will only work if you have people who can jump in until a new generation has been raised to democratic values...

oh, and I agree that communism will not work. humans are egoistic, its in their genes.
 
Originally posted by Archangel
well, in Star trek communism worked...
Click to expand...
<Shoots Archangel in the face>
Oh, whoops - this isn't The Arena.
Perhaps Communism won't work but something around that kind of equality is something to work TOWARDS. It's time to start punishing the fat-cats and help the poor - this means a Nationalised Hospital/Health Service, America. For starters.
 
What you must remember is the difference between socialism and communism. Marx and Engels believed that the only way to instate communism was through a revolution, and that will always be seen as "being forced" upon the people. If it isn't done with a revolution, it isn't communism...

And democracy is misunderstood. America isn't a democracy, it's a republic. There's a huge difference. There isn't a single democracy in the world, because democracy only works in very, very small societies, not in huge countries.

People in the western world see "democracy" as something divine, something "right", something "good", something that everyone should have. That's not exactly a good point of view. As someone said before, forcing "democracy" and capitalism on a nation is no better than forcing tyranny and communism.

And my statement about the suicide bombers not being terrorists... that was a bit rash. They are, but it of course depends on the definition of the word "terrorist". In a way, they are the Palestinian "army", and armies have always killed civilians. Was destroying two perfectly innocent Japanese cities with no militarical importance whatsoever with nuclear weapons not terrorism? No, you say. That was also an attack on civilians.
 
Originally posted by El_Chi
<Shoots Archangel in the face>
Oh, whoops - this isn't The Arena.
Perhaps Communism won't work but something around that kind of equality is something to work TOWARDS. It's time to start punishing the fat-cats and help the poor - this means a Nationalised Hospital/Health Service, America. For starters.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I know right wing Americans who go on about how inefficient a Nationalised Health service is, and you have to wait a while for routine operations. But they don't seem to release that of course it's going to be efficient if not everyone has access to it.

Arguing against a Free Health Service is like arguing against free education.
 
Originally posted by Fenrir
Was destroying two perfectly innocent Japanese cities with no militarical importance whatsoever with nuclear weapons not terrorism? No, you say. That was also an attack on civilians.
Click to expand...

They were warned, they wouldn't listen, so they were bombed. Twice. Simple no? I think we should have done the same thing to Berlin back then. Wouldn't had to have lost so many lives on D day that way.
 
Originally posted by Fenrir
As someone said before, forcing "democracy" and capitalism on a nation is no better than forcing tyranny and communism.
Click to expand...
The thing is, people have complained that you can't FORCE an ideology (such as Communism) on a society, however national elections impose certain choices on many many people who didn't want that choice. Plus, the only reason most people wouldn't view Capitalism as having been FORCED upon them is because it wasn't done recently nor did it happen with any kind of planned action. Capitalism is just something that has happened to society and civilisation. It's always been, therefore it's comfortable for a great many people, but just because it happened, doesn't mean it's right.
And saying Communism would never work because people are greedy is pathetic (in the literal sense of the word, not as a directed insult). Capitalism suffers the exact same problem except that it's acceptable for some disgusting reason because that is simply the nature of the beast. "Oh it's a dog-eat-dog world out there." Bollocks. There's no reason why it ought to be.
The thing about democracy, however, is that it keeps civilisations in some kind of balance (even if everyone simply hates each other and I'm using the word balance in the broadest possible terms) which is a virtue in that as soon as center party politics fails is when all hell breaks loose.
 
Originally posted by Echelon

for the 9/11 issue, there are many unanswered questions. i even saw some "proof" that there was no plane which hit the pentagon, but somethign else. i don't know whether it's true but it made me think of the whole thing. so many things which are odd and don't fit.
Click to expand...

If you want further read on that here's a link to a 9/11 conspiracy
http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html

It's very long but provides some great evidence. I think you should all read it. I'm not asking you to believe all that, but it does make you skeptical and makes you think, to see the big picture, so to speak.

It states for instance that Bush was watching the towers on TV, filmed in NYC by a FBI(?) agent BEFORE the planes had crashed into the towers.
He knew about it on beforehand! I'm not good at explaining this with my own words and it definately doesn't sound believeable but just read the site and you'll know what I mean.

Another example that is stated on the site is that the plane that supposedly crashed into Pentagon wasn't found. Nothing strange about that you think? But I mean nothing, not even some small pieces of the plane, no bodies or limbs, no evidence whatsoever. Isn't that a bit strange eh?? Could it have been a U.S. missile that hit Pentagon?
Hell I hope not, but then again you'd have to be a very good pilot to fly straight into Pentagon just like that.. at least with a plane.

Aslo and no offence, but the WTC towers were actually built to withtstand a plane crash in the first place, it wouldn't have collapsed that easily just by a plane crash, unless, UNLESS there was a bomd planted inside the towers long before. And the last thing which I'm going to mention (the site has alot more theories and evidence to provide than I do) but ONE thing that I haven't thought about before is HOW the towers collapsed. BOTH of them! I mean c'mon, look at how they fall, isn't it "too perfect" somehow. And both the in the same style like I said.
Just like when an old building is demolished by explosives planted inside.

You must admit, that the way the towers fell was too smooth. Instead they would have fallen to the sides and destroyed other buildings as well. I can't explain this so well with my non-native english, you know what I mean, but that part DOES seem very unreal to me.

Once again, give it a try, it's a long read but an interesting one. Not required to take everything for granted!
I really hope that stuff isn't true and I fell sorry for all the victims of 9/11 but this last event: Bush and Blair stating that there were no obvious reasons for the Iraq-war really makes you think.


BTW: Sorry if this is a bit off-topic.
 
that star trek thing was a joke, man. Anyway, by democracy I usually mean a society where the people elect their own goverment. thats not the same as the antic democracy, but close.

About weather or not communism is possible:

First, communism means there is no money, so you have no limitation how much you "buy" (acquire). Everything belongs to everybody, the philosophy behind that is that everybody just takes what he needs. now, i statet that every human is egoistic. this does not mean that everybody only looks after himself, but everone tends to act in a way that benefits him more than the other at certain points (I call that the firefighter dilemma. Imagine you are a firefighter and you are called to a burning house. Your house, to be exact. You know your child is in there, as well as a friend of your child. You know that you can only save one. Who will you choose?) People will choose their own child, and its that kind of egoism that I mean. Its not something bad, its natural to look after ones own offspring first. So people will try to be better as another one in a communist society, and try to give their offspring an advantage over the rest. Simple as that. it might be different after e couple of generations, but until then, everything for everybody is simply impossible. To prepare the people for communism, socialism was "invented", and here things start to get ugly. A socialistic society always needs a strong leader - a bit like hitler, yes (in fact, nazi means nationalsocialist...rings a bell?). even if this man is full of good intentions, I believe that power always compromises. Having the power to do (almost) anything makes one use it for ones own advantage.

About the a-bomb dropping: did you know that the japanese asked for a capitulation prioir to hiroshima? The US refused...go figure.
 
I haven't visited the site yet but I can provide quick answers to two of these.

Originally posted by Dax
Another example that is stated on the site is that the plane that supposedly crashed into Pentagon wasn't found. Nothing strange about that you think? But I mean nothing, not even some small pieces of the plane, no bodies or limbs, no evidence whatsoever. Isn't that a bit strange eh?? Could it have been a U.S. missile that hit Pentagon?
Hell I hope not, but then again you'd have to be a very good pilot to fly straight into Pentagon just like that.. at least with a plane.
Click to expand...

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm.

This page near enough debunks that rumour. It shows at least one picture with some wreckage of the plane. Also, the pilot wasn't great, he hit the ground before hitting the pentagon. Read the page, it's from a really good site which talks about rumours and such.

Originally posted by Dax
Aslo and no offence, but the WTC towers were actually built to withtstand a plane crash in the first place, it wouldn't have collapsed that easily just by a plane crash, unless, UNLESS there was a bomd planted inside the towers long before. And the last thing which I'm going to mention (the site has alot more theories and evidence to provide than I do) but ONE thing that I haven't thought about before is HOW the towers collapsed. BOTH of them! I mean c'mon, look at how they fall, isn't it "too perfect" somehow. And both the in the same style like I said.
Just like when an old building is demolished by explosives planted inside.

You must admit, that the way the towers fell was too smooth. Instead they would have fallen to the sides and destroyed other buildings as well. I can't explain this so well with my non-native english, you know what I mean, but that part DOES seem very unreal to me.
Click to expand...

The World Trade Centres did withstand the plane crashes. They weren't built to survive a plane crash, but the way they were built helped them not to collapse as soon as the planes hit them. They actually collapsed because of the resulting fire melted the supporting beams. The towers didn't weaken on one side, that's why they didn't tip.

Check out: http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/usterror/usterror.jsp?id=ns99991281 for more details.

Also, your English is fine. Better than mine.
 
ok.. I'm glad you proved me wrong on that part...
I've got that thing on my mind ever sinced I read that site. :-/

But frankly, I don't know what to believe anymore. :(
And certainly not Bush nor Blair.
 
Originally posted by Dax
ok.. I'm glad you proved me wrong on that part...
I've got that thing on my mind ever sinced I read that site. :-/

But frankly, I don't know what to believe anymore. :(
And certainly not Bush nor Blair.
Click to expand...

Its atleast good that your willing to get all the info you can, instead of jumping to conclusions on what really happened.
 
Ahh I love the American bashing (and they wonder why Americans are so defensive).

I just would like to point out that no one has offered any alternatives to everything discussed so far, (except for the communism part) what should America have done after 9/11? What should they have done with that shit head and his sons what should the WORLD have done and what should everyone be doing now that they aren't doing? Where is the correct path? Or should I say what was?
 
Well we should have took more time to investigate 9/11, tell me how the fbi came to find out who executed 9/11 only 3 days after the attack? Ivestigations should have occured both federal and independant. If it was then discovered who executed the attack we should have went to the UN and asked for assisstance in afghanistan. About Iraq, we should have pushed for tougher longer weapons inspections because if you recall iraq was destroying missiles before bush gave the alltimadum (sp?) Longer inspections and if it still didn't work we should have worked at getting global approval before moving in like we did... You always have choices, and you can not sit there and tell me that saddam was a threat to america, he wouldn't have done anything, even if he had wmd he wouldn't have used them because he would have proved bush right, so the wmd argument was fake, sure saddam killed a lot of innocent people but so did we (and you think using gas and chemicals on your own people is horrible, well guess what the american goverment tested chemical and biological agents on alaska and hawaii and this information was just recently declassified, so i wonder what else the government is keeping a secret) And another thing, big bad saddam actually came to america in the early 80's and was even given the key to the city of detroit for donating a large some of money to a catholic church there... and i bet he has been in the white house since gulf war 1 more times than any of us can count, and don't you also find it funny that osama bin laden used to work for the cia in afghanistan don't believe me? Well search for the info its out there... (heheh sorry for waking this thread back up, i was gone for a few days, and i didn't relize it had died)
 
...Or How I Stopped Worring and Learned To Love The Bomb

Fenrir - that comment about nuking those japanese cities is crap. Dropping those nukes was the best thing that could have happened to the japanese left wing peace seekers. Their right wing 'honor' society would have never have surrendered. NEVER. Personally I would have dragged the battle on and have had millions of japanese casuilties and a couple thousand Allied casuilties. That way at least their society would respect us more and there would have been no Yoko Ono! And the Beatles would have still been together.
 
We can kill more with sanctions then with bombs. A counter arguement to not going to war with iraq would be that those people want to be oppressed, raped and tortured. Why would anybody want to rape a arab muslim woman? eew!!!
 
9/11 really didn't turn out how the terrorists wanted. Remember that they thought that there would have been a domino effect if they just fly a plane into it. lol where are they getting their info from? Apparently from reruns of loony tunes.
 
Originally posted by Feath
I haven't visited the site yet but I can provide quick answers to two of these.



http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm.

This page near enough debunks that rumour. It shows at least one picture with some wreckage of the plane. Also, the pilot wasn't great, he hit the ground before hitting the pentagon. Read the page, it's from a really good site which talks about rumours and such.



The World Trade Centres did withstand the plane crashes. They weren't built to survive a plane crash, but the way they were built helped them not to collapse as soon as the planes hit them. They actually collapsed because of the resulting fire melted the supporting beams. The towers didn't weaken on one side, that's why they didn't tip.

Check out: http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/usterror/usterror.jsp?id=ns99991281 for more details.

Also, your English is fine. Better than mine.
Click to expand...

maybe you should read the information on this site. i also wan't to get all information i can get. but the two sites you linked here don't really convince me. though the idea that the cia could be responsible for 9/11 is cruel. not the idea itself but it's content.

the first one shows the first part of debris i have seen ;) ...ok so far. but it' still doesn't eplain where the plane was gone and how it could cause such a "small" damage. there are aerial pictures which show the pentagon right after the attacks..there's no debris of a plane like that. i doubt they could remove it within one day from all the 4 rings which were damaged.

and the second one doesn't answer any question's which where asked on one of the sides. i only wanna mention the fact that 420000 tons of concrete were completely vaporized (sp)? or the fires which are supposed to have melted the beams. some ppl say the smoke was black after a few minutes and not as strong as it was a few minutes after the impact. that would indicate that the fire didn't burn as strong. and i don't know whether it is true. but plane fuel is supposed to burn at 800°C. but the steel used in the wtc would have melted at 1500°. that's the most odd thing.
it just repeats the "official" theory. and exactly this one seems to be wrong if you read the other sides, which ask the questions, carefully.

and it'S not only these two things but dozen of questions concerning things like the behavior of gwb and other things.

no offense to anyone, even if you don't believe 90% of these information ( http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html ), it still makes you think.
 
I do believe that that site belongs with such things as:

* NASA never landed on the moon
* The Holocaust didn't happen.

All three have compelling arguements but are ultimately false.
 
Originally posted by Fat Tony!
i think that basicly we can say america has done lots of things to ruin the world but also lots to help however i cant help saying that the bad out weighs the good
Click to expand...
The bad outweighing the good... I take it that you think it's not that important that we prevented your country being communistic, you not being able to say that the US has done any good things, being brainwashed in a school system, not being able to say anything bad about your father hitler their, having people you know killed etc. I mean jesus come on does ANYONE remember the holocaust already? Also why do people include comments like I think its funny how america tries to intervene with everything, can I even begin to express the ignorance of that statement? How can you possibly think something as serious as this would be funny!?!?! Also what has america done to "ruin" the world, yea the american people just got up one day and said, hey lets make the world worse and ruin it, and what's with the whole interfering connotation on america's actions? As if you all could have solved crap yourself when britain's cities are getting bombed nightly and almost all of europe is soon to be under german control. You know I seem to think you people haven't gotten over the Monroe Doctrine, you know back in the 1800's in which we said that we will not interfere with european affairs unless they interfered with things in the western hemisphere, which obviously doesn't apply now days due to things such as ranged missiles etc. So would you people so seperate us from europe when we rely on eachother so heavily? If america was part of europe we wouldn't be getting half the shit we get now days, and yes I do also believe it is an amount of jealousy invoked, you could see it in yourself if you lived over here, they criticize every damn little thing we do and only excentuate negative things instead of positive so the whole of euerope thinks we drive around shooting eachother all day long. Also to say the bad outweighs the good I hope you realize that you are saying that it is so important to you as it would be better had things not happened as such and you had not existed to begin with? Also war with N. Korea is unlikely because Kim Jong loves american movies and why we he attack a source of his entertainment, =P. Also saying that another dictator will replace saddam in 20 years is ignorant as hell, what are you talking about that doesn't even make sense? Grow up and accept some logic here and quit just spouting crap that sounds controversial to appear mature.
 
Britain was almost communist?! AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!


Run for the hills! I knew something was up when Badger started calling himself Comrade...Why he would call himself that i don't know. Then the vodka he drank..oh man that was just too much for any one....group of a dozen men. This explains Tony Blair announcing that grain yields are up by 300% and worker productivity is through the roof. He also stated that everyone was happy....Or else.


PS On a slightly more serious note. When people say funny, they don't always mean humorous. It can mean odd as well. You have to look at the context of the sentence. Oh and trust me on this one. As an honest person i am saying, Europe is in no way jealous of America.


Anyway, thats all im going to say. I said i wouldnt get involved in this debate and im not going to any more than this.
 
I'm also afraid of the N. Korea vs US idea... i just hope some fool over there will not care about living and pull all that kamakazi bullshit... cause i know the US wants to live enough not to start war with them.
 
Think of this as like the matrix, 200+ years ago it was the europeans time, they bossed little countries around with millitary might killing who they pleased. Then one day they made America, and for a time it was good the relationship was mutually bennificial. Then America got pissed off and rebelled. The USA became an unbeatable superpower which let the other countries feel they had some means of control to keep them at bay. However when we attack people without consent you realize you really have no control.

Say that in an Agent Smith voice and youll probably get scared because you know its true.
 
How about looking at it like in that film Instinct. You are not in control, you are only under the illusion of control.

Push to much and people might just push back...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
12K
Barnz
B
B
The cut missions of Half-Life: Decay
Replies
2
Views
21K
Evo
Evo
-smash-
  • Locked
Secret Santa Sign-Ups and Wishlists
Replies
14
Views
3K
User With No Name
User With No Name
Omnomnick
The International 2014 Teams Announced
Replies
0
Views
5K
Omnomnick
Omnomnick
Back
Top