I think the "help in Iraq" was about helping out the soldiers already there. That's how I read it.
Printable View
I think the "help in Iraq" was about helping out the soldiers already there. That's how I read it.
As Gerbick pointed out, I was speaking along a line of logic from the previous comment. I meant helping directly with something the companies country doesn't agree with, at least in founding principle.Quote:
Originally Posted by flipsideguy
But, anyway, why does that point need to be proven? I haven't made it a secret that I do believe we have and still are "helping" Iraq. Many Iraqi's agree. But, I'm sure you would discount them just as you discount Chinese dissidents serving prison time for criticizing their government.
Thanks. More ad hominem attacks. God forbid someone see beyond your insults? And I'm the one with the superiority complex? The only thing that has hit home for me from what you've posted in this thread is that you're prone to fits. Is it a bit of folly that I entertain it at all? YesQuote:
Originally Posted by flipsideguy
Ok. Lets talk about freedom of speech. Lets also be accurate in our claims. Images of fallen soldiers coffins have never been banned at any point. They have been restricted from being released by the government. But, if someone has them, they are free to show them. Not releasing the government photos is a matter of privacy. I wouldnt want the government taking any photos of me and releasing them to the public without my permission. I think that concept follows to the sensative matter of a death and a families right to privacy. What documentaries have been banned by the US?Quote:
Originally Posted by flipsideguy
I havent dodged a thing. Your posts have just been so lacking in anything but insults that there isnt much to work with. Its like we havent gotten into anything like this for long enough that you forgot Im a human being and Ive started to represent all of these giant political boogie-men in your head and we have to go through a bunch of rhetoric all over again just to dispell the myth.Quote:
Originally Posted by flipsideguy
Chinese (as far as I know) don't have the right to bear arms either. If they did, free speech would probably follow. Peoples tongues wag a lot easier and they get a lot braver when they have a gun in their hands. Let's not free the Chinese from oppression, let's arm them and let them do it themselves.
Consider for a second how US citizens would feel if a more enlightened culture (not hard to imagine) suggested that the right to bear firearms was detrimental to the growth of your society and that this right should be abolished. This foreign society then decided because they had bigger guns and stupider politicians (that is hard to imagine) that they were going to help free the US from its own evil ways by imposing their will upon the godless US heathens.
In reality, nobody cares a whit what the US does as long as they're only doing it to themselves. Unfortunately, the US motto seems to be "Do unto others, that are different from you, BEFORE they do unto you (or just in case they might do unto you)".
All cruelty springs from weakness.
- Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Then, who would the "lets" be in the hypothetical arming of Chinese citizens?
Would this make you also against US involvement in say, Kosovo or farther back in Korea?
Nobody, it was an attempt to illustrate the stupidity of forcing a foreign government to allow free speech with a parallel but equally stupid example of trying to kick start an equally unwanted revolution.Quote:
Then, who would the "lets" be in the hypothetical arming of Chinese citizens?
Do they want free speech and other western type stuff? Probably. As much as you empathize with the individuals crying out for freedom and as much as you want to help them, you can't give it to them, they have to earn it for themselves. How did the US get it? Had their own little revolution. When the majority of Chinese people want it badly enough, it will happen.
I am against involvement of any kind where the legitimate government of a country doesn't specifically ask for help. UN sanctioned involvement for humanitarian reasons is different, but it would have to be a pretty strong case and not just the unilateral decision of a minority of member countries looking to protect their own financial interests.Quote:
Would this make you also against US involvement in say, Kosovo or farther back in Korea?
How much money has the US spent on war in Iraq? A few billion a month was the last figure I heard (that may not be accurate). If they had spent that much dough, or even a fraction of it, on R&D into alternative fuels, financial aid for the poor, education, <pick a cause>... I'm betting it would have been better spent than buying and shipping coffins filled with dead US soldiers from Iraq to the US.
I mostly agree with this and haven't said otherwise. How to help them get freedom is one thing. My concern has been how some companies are helping to keep it from them. That's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northcode
Also, the US did have their own revolution, but other countries were involved. For instance, it would not have happened at all had the French not helped. I dont think China is an example of this but I think there are ways that the US could have that same helping role for other people.
Time will tell whether or not it was worth it. Im sure there will be people that cling to their convictions until their bitter end. But, after the next few generations is gone, I believe history will show that it was the right thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northcode
What google does in foreign countries is googles business. If you were the one making the money off decisions like this you would do the same. They are a business that caters to groups of people, if they have to restrict some things for a slot in a specific market, then that is what they should do.
In my opinion they are playing the money making game and winning so more power to them.
[quote by flipsideguy](as in the collective ignorant American)[/quote]
Could you please broaden your veiw at least a little and not include all Americans in this generalisation. We are all individuals. If you have a problem with a countries decisions say it. But don't speak of all Americans this way. It shows a little bit of hate toward a group that is not all the same.
The French government didn't come into our revolution until damn near the end of it, when it was obvious that we would have won it anyway, and they didn't do it for us, they did it cause they hate the Brits.Quote:
Also, the US did have their own revolution, but other countries were involved. For instance, it would not have happened at all had the French not helped.
And if you know any history at all, which I doubt, you know what that help eventually cost them.
I did by no means call all Americans dumb or anything demeaning. I grouped a certain member into the category of average Americans whose ignorance to world views is only exceeded by their inability to think for them selves, and blindly follow hegemonistic ideologies without considering the repercussions.Quote:
Originally Posted by pea3698
I made many friendships during my 7 year visit in the US, and some of them are among my closests friends. Though none of them have a restricted world view - where a country must share your freedoms and beliefs or else...
If we all adopted the American way of thinking there would be no Kyoto Accord, but we'd have more pollution, we'd have more pre-emptive wars, nuclear proliferation and more guns out on the streets and in our homes.
Some members are so arrogant in their way of thinking, wanting US companies to go to a country yet follow US laws. They also cry for some 100 journalist while "time will tell" that it is OK to kill 50,000 civilians in the name of spreading democracy.
Spare us the 'but I want them to be free' crap, because if you support the killing of so many innocent civilians by your government, then you are in no position to blast the Chinese government for jailing journalist that have broken Chinese laws.
without frances loans the revolutionary army would have come apart... damn near did with their loans anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ask The Geezer
you have the kyota accord and more pollution.. its a win win!Quote:
Originally Posted by flipsideguy
Well there are about 130 or so wars going on around the world. Most don't involve the u.s. I don't think the u.s. had anythign to do with Indias, pakistans, or isreal's aquistion of nuclear weapons. I don't think it is an american reactor in persia.Quote:
we'd have more pre-emptive wars, nuclear proliferation and more guns out on the streets and in our homes.
how many iraq war threads are going on right now?
Yes, no doubt. Loans are one thing, troops are another. And the reason they almost came apart anyway was, because then, as now, all the money went into the hands of the rich, and none of it went into the hands of the people actually fighting the war.Quote:
Originally Posted by TallGuyLittleCar
Just about all those in favor of or active in the revolution went pretty close to bankrupt. The simple fact is that there wasn't much money behind the revolution. The "rich" were generally loyalists... i mean if you are rich why upset the apple cart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ask The Geezer
I don't think many french troops every made it to soil... sure a few generals and volunteers here and there (many needed officers), but most of their military aid was on the sea.
You mean, all those who signed the declaration went bankrupt. The ones who did the actual fighting had nothing to begin with. The signers were gambling, with their necks, it's true, but they were speculating, cause they knew that if they won, they would be the keepers of the money bags and the ones who did the fighting would get nothing, again.Quote:
Originally Posted by TallGuyLittleCar
Although, they did get the right to vote, and 160 acres of land nobody else wanted anyway. Except the indians it was stolen from.
You forget, the revolutionary war was started by a very few radical long haired hippy freaks of the day, not by the multitude of farmers that couln't read and write and had just as good a life under the king as they ended up getting under the new government.
well there were alot of supporters who did not sign the declaration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ask The Geezer
[qutoe]The ones who did the actual fighting had nothing to begin with
[/quote]
they had even less after a few years service in the revolutionary army.
some of the signers died in debt.Quote:
The signers were gambling, with their necks, it's true, but they were speculating, cause they knew that if they won, they would be the keepers of the money bags and the ones who did the fighting would get nothing, again.
nope I didn't forget.Quote:
You forget, the revolutionary war was started by a very few radical long haired hippy freaks of the day, not by the multitude of farmers that couln't read and write and had just as good a life under the king as they ended up getting under the new government.
I think my point was that all wars are started by a few at the top, either whipping people who can't think for themselves into going along with it, or ordering their thralls to do the fighting. I wonder how many wars would be fought if the people who actually wanted the fight did it themsleves and paid for it themsleves.
You mean, like arms, eyeballs and legs?Quote:
they had even less after a few years service in the revolutionary army
I get what you're saying. But to be honest I think the revolutionary war was faught largely by people that believed in it. Now it is possible that they were whipped up into a frenzy, but all in all it was a fairly small war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ask The Geezer
prolly just the religous ones.Quote:
I wonder how many wars would be fought if the people who actually wanted the fight did it themsleves and paid for it themsleves.
the measure of how good a surgeon was in the day was how fast he could saw through a leg.Quote:
You mean, like arms, eyeballs and legs?
Question, have you ever been to another country (besides Mexico, I guess that if you live in LA you've gone to Mexico at least once), and live there for a while, and see the point of views of others?Quote:
Originally Posted by indivision
You know, over here (Ecuador), when 9/11 happened, what was the general reaction and comments: "It's sad, the ones who died were innocent people, but as a country, they deserved it". It might sound extremist, but it's a belief that exists almost everywhere outside the US. Why? because people think the US should stop getting into everybody else's business and mind their own.
I think that you should have your beliefs and your own perspective of things, but I also think that that way of thinking has put the US in a vulnerable situation.
If you came to latin america for a few months, you'd realize how different the world is. Over here, people don't like the US, because they have a lot to do in the economic situation. Mostly, you're going to hear the US is the oppressive government, not for the americans, but for the people in other countries. You do see a lot of political and economical pressure from the US to other countries so that those do what the US wants.
By the way, I'm not anti-US, I just laugh when my friends kind of react and try to convince me that I'm doing wrong because I get my money from american companies. What I do believe is that there's a lot of americans that have a false view of the reality outside their countries.
Just one example (and with this I don't want to say that what happens in China isn't true). When I was in the States, a small revolution happened in Ecuador, we kicked out our president, i think it's like the 6th in 2 years. But I saw it in CNN I think. Wow, holy damn, I though, it's a riot, people are dying, it's a mess, lets invade Ecuador and control the situation, I thought....I called my family in Ecuador, all worried, thinking, and what do they tell me? "Bah, don't worry, is the same sh*t as usual. It'll be over in a couple of days". When I was there, every time I heard something about Ecuador, it was something bad: corruption, human rights violation, natural disasters, whatever. The thing is, that it was just that the information provided was so little and out of context, that if I wasn't ecuadorian, I would have decided never to visit that country :D Yes, we do have problems, we've had cases of human right violations, people killed by the government (or so we think), etc. But you know, over here, people do their best to overcome those problems to have a better society. The problem isn't that we don't want to change. The problem is that there isn't a reason to change. People won't give up on what they have to try to have something better. They'll try to get the most for themselves. It's selfishness. It's human nature. It's 500 years of history, and yes, a lot of the problems that happen over here (and in LatinAmerica), happen because of how we were starting 500 years ago. A lot of the problems are cultural. Anyway, you know what else? I'm 26, and I've only seen everybody united in my country, only twice: when we classified for the first time to the soccer worldcup (for the Japan/Korea one), and when we had a conflict with Peru, that became a small war over who owns what piece of land. And then, damn, everybody wanted to do everything, so we don't get invaded, or lose our pride. So, I would bet everything I have, that if the US decides to come here and "help" us, we, as a country, would fight back, because we don't need anybody coming here to tell us what to do.
I would guess that the chinese would react that way, too, and my guess is that's why there are still riots in Irak, too. While for you, you see it as help, it might be that for others, you are been seen as invaders. It's all a matter of perspective. For example, I, again, have been in the states, and my opinion is, you were free, not anymore. If you want to be free, there are better places.
That's it. I think you are entitled to have your own opinion. I hope you respect mine, and you see, my opinion is also the opinion of a lot of people outside the US.
Ah, one more thing :)
it may sound crazy to you, but over here (Ecuador), there's also the opinion from a group of people, that to stop all the political and economical problems, we need a dictatorship. Someone that makes a decision, and fights for it, and if someone opposses, then BAM! shoot the guy. Why? because over here nothing gets done because there's always a group of people opossing to everything. So, the main idea is: whether it's right or wrong, at least something gets done.
I somehow agree with that. It'd suck, but it seems it's the only way some people would learn.