Contrary to popular opinion (in America), communism is not evil. If you're talking about Marxism, which you are, then yes it is. Allow me to make my argument more intellectual with an multiple-choice analogy quiz: COMMUNISM is to EVIL as: A) SUN is to BRIGHT B) WATER is to WET C) POOP is to STINKY D) all of the above The correct answer is D, my commie friend. | |
Why is this? What exactly did we do? Just curious. [EDIT: It turns out this reply no longer applies to Britain. Never mind...] The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. | |
And you don't think other countries do? That is a human thing, not a country thing. Americans are picked on more because of shows like Jerry Springer and such. Those shows show the worst part of Americans. I am sure England, France, and lots of other countrys have people just like that. Only difference is that they don't put them on TV for the world to view and judge.
| |
Scoobert wrote:
And you don't think other countries do? Sure, but not as frequently as Americans do it. My uncle walks around blaming taxes on Mexicans illegally crossing the border and seems to think that without them we'd have no taxes or financial issues. My grandpa actually believes that myth that Mexicans are launching from a cannon over the border(caught that one on Myth Busters, I did!). Basically they are using racism as a sub-conscious escape. I'll go to school and hear something like: "He's a white boy, he ain't got no hops," an example of how it plays into everyday life. As far as other countries' citizens are concerned, it's the same thing. Many Americans tend to visualize the British as proper people that talk funny or whatever(which turned into some funny characters on Family Guy), many see Mexicans as poor farm-hands or roofers that could be employed with low pay(yeah, I've heard those stories, too). They are viewed in a general sense rather than an individual one. On the other hand, many countries do like America and Americans(while many others hate us from the bottom of their hearts), and respect us appropriately. Hiead | |
Shades wrote:
I dont see any major threat in being in a country that dosent want us that, were the only thing we are doing, is wasting money and killing our troops. We get to become too much of a pacifistic country, allowing for more attacks like September 11 to take place without consequence. Some may argue that he was a dictator and that he was abusing his people, but that would be his own buisness, not ours. We are not permoting freedom, we are forcing it on people, which is just as bad. I'll argue that he was a major risk to us, and that with the right amount of time, he would likely be attacking us, possibly be the next "Hitler." He could probably even get North Korea to support him if he entered an all-out war against the U.S. or other country. Saddam isnt a mayjor threat to us, George W. Bush is. I am a George W. Bush supporter, myself. Under the consideration that I would've done much the same things had I been put into his position. He can't just blow the place up because he is nice enough to promote the happiness of the citizens. He can't take FOREVER because the American public will lose interest and force him out. So what is he forced into? The middle. He can't please everybody; he has to go out one way or the other. Hiead | |
Hmm, im not too fond of a guy that got this almighty bill (No Child left behind) which was supposed to help children but then on BET and the radio 95.5 they talking about they have found lines that have been made public that basically say then when/if the bill is passed they will have the right to go into highschools and select children age 16 or older to do whatever the wish. =/ So in my honest opinion this guy can kiss my ass because I would rather die than fight for his rule.
| |
Hiead wrote:
We get to become too much of a pacifistic country, allowing for more attacks like September 11 to take place without consequence. Pacifist? USA? HAHAHA! That's rich! We proactively stick our big nose where it doesn't belong. We actively destroy and corrupt other coutries in order to further our own agendas. If anything, we need to be more passive. Why did we get hit on 9/11? Because we tried to impose our ideals on people who really didn't want to hear it. We stole from them, killed them, replaced their leaders with corrupt dictators (We put Saddam in power and gave him weapons). We were being real jerks, and we got our nose bloodied for it. I'll argue that he was a major risk to us, and that with the right amount of time, he would likely be attacking us, possibly be the next "Hitler." He could probably even get North Korea to support him if he entered an all-out war against the U.S. or other country. Saddam has never been, nor will he ever be, a threat to the US. We went in there because we couldn't go after Osama, and W. needed to show he was tough on terrorism. Saddam has always been a despot, and had absolutley nothing to do with anything that happened to us on 9/11. His only real crime against America was not bending over far enough when we told him too. North Korea has, right now, in their possesion, nuclear weapons. Kim has threatened to use them on us, blatantly calling us to war. Why are we ignoring him? We rushed into Iraq because of the supposed 'weapons of mass destruction' he maybe had, according to some report which turned out to be wrong. Kim really has them. And he's insane enough to use them. Why are we just turning our back on that? He's a huge threat to us, and the world. But no, the bad guy is the one hiding in a hole, cowering and pissing himself from fear of us. It's sure not the insane dictator who weilds the power to destroy us. Certainly not. I am a George W. Bush supporter, myself. Under the consideration that I would've done much the same things had I been put into his position. He can't just blow the place up because he is nice enough to promote the happiness of the citizens. He can't take FOREVER because the American public will lose interest and force him out. So what is he forced into? The middle. He can't please everybody; he has to go out one way or the other. I loathe George W. Bush. I think he's the most dispicable human being to ever hold power. Yes, I think he is worse than Hitler. I think he is worse than Stalin and Kim. I think he's about the lowest form of scum I've ever loathed. I'd say so to his face, too. You'd do the same thing he did, Hiead? So, you're saying you'd bring about a huge tradgedy with your greed, ignore your responsibilty to defend us from said tragedy, with obvious prior knowledge? You'd sit for 30 minutes reading a story about a goat to a kindergarten classroom while thousands of people were dying? You'd ignore the events until the time came that you couldn't stop them? Only the president can scramble jets and strike down a civilian plane. He was aware of the hijackings, the first crash (oddly enough, before anyone briefed him), and he had the power and time to stop those planes before they hit the Pentagon and the second tower. He wasn't whisked out of that classroom by the Secret Service, and he remained because "he didn't want to frighten the children." Screw the children! Save us you idiot! Only you could! You'd lie to billions of people on national T.V. Use scare tactics to assume even more power and remove the rights of everyday people that were granted to us in the Constitution? You'd hire hatemongers and fanatics to your cabinet and supreme court? You'd wadge war on a people who did nothing to us just because you need an outlet for your vengence? You'd use people's faith as a tool for your own personal gain? You're telling me you'd do all these things, with a smile painted on your face and a fake baby Jesus on your shoulder? You make me sick. Don't support Bush. Support our young men and women who have to die because he's an evil moron. ~X | |
Xooxer, I love you, will you have my children?
You have like hit every single word Ive been thinking for a long time, and as we full well know from the news, more and more people are finally starting to think like us. Bush needs to go down, bad. | |
You're really passionate about this. I even think you may be a Saddam-sympathizer; you make him out to be an angel. Other than that, I can't say I have all the "facts" that you have against Bush in firm belief. Some statements were true, including the prior knowledge to the security risks where nothing was done to prevent social chaos. (If you remember a certain president took nearly the same actions when a certain communist country was transporting certain powerful weapons to a certain nearby communist country; that is, he hesitated to tell the public, granted that he did at least look into it and took some action)
About him hesitating to take action, that is something I do believe he did in major error. All security threats should be taken as truthful and of highest priority until proven false or of minimal danger. And yes, I know he wasn't going after nuclear weapons when he entered Iraq. Another mistake, I believe, as he was really only doing it to take oil from the Middle East and show America and allies that he is actively trying to eliminate major threats when, as you mentioned, Kim would still be evidently a larger threat than Saddam even if Saddam did have them. And as far as him taking actions to strengthen himself, I see where that is 2/3 true. Taking oil from another country could be nothing else. But a communist leader who kills and tortures without a second thought is a threat to everybody, inside and outside the country. Again, this is a threat to the U.S.'s power, so it makes sense that the ones at the head would do what they can to firm their own security. The passion you have for this topic is probably the same passion that they have for government systems. They hate Communists, and would like nothing more than to see a democratic world. Other than that, I hate politics...especially political debates. So I'm done on this topic. Later, Hiead | |
We went in there because we couldn't go after Osama, and W. needed to show he was tough on terrorism. Aw, be fair... there were PLENTY of reasons to go into Iraq. The site below identified 24. Granted, some aren't as compelling as others, and there's some overlap; but still, it's a decent list all in all. http://web.archive.org/web/20041027214801/http:// blog.johnkerry.com/rapidresponse/archives/003309.html As for that "worse than Hitler" remark, all I can say is that it brings to mind Winston Churchill's famous quip: "OMGWTFLOL!" | |
I've always had a real problem with Vietnam. I mean, c'mon. The US went in to stop a few poor, farming countries from turning commie. Contrary to popular opinion (in America), communism is not evil. Stopping a tiny out of the way country from having a economic reform that could well have benifited the populace of said country is in no way justification for a freakin' war.
I mean, it wasn't about to hurt the industry of Vietnam, right?
Instead the soldiers burnt down forests and homes, murdered innocents (yes, often that couldn't be helped...the way the terrorists were often also the people they were trying to protect didn't help ;) ), and deforested large amounts of Vietnam's greenery with Agent Orange.
I forget what the topic was about now.