Irresponsability
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Red Stateler wrote:
Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed.
Maybe the same applies to all the world the problems you attribute to the rise of atheism. The shackles of an oppressive dictatorship are being removed, and for a while people will experience trouble getting used to their new-found freedom.
-
K(arl) wrote:
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
I agree that's a major problem that needs to be dealt with. I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
K(arl) wrote:
So when SH was in power, they did not?
It was more a matter of Hussein killing Iraqis than the Iraqi people killing eachother, but you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
China is a different matter altogether. The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war. Whether or not that will work remains to be seen.
Red Stateler wrote:
Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed.
-
K(arl) wrote:
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
I agree that's a major problem that needs to be dealt with. I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
K(arl) wrote:
So when SH was in power, they did not?
It was more a matter of Hussein killing Iraqis than the Iraqi people killing eachother, but you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
China is a different matter altogether. The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war. Whether or not that will work remains to be seen.
Red Stateler wrote:
China is a different matter altogether. The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war. Whether or not that will work remains to be seen.
And the effects of that war are begining to be seen, with accusations of inferior quality merchandise flying between the US and China. At least the US has it half won, China is fighting on capitalist terms.
-
Bush Warns U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq Would Destabilize Mideast[^]. Of course, the US invasion did not.
Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first Fold with us! ¤ flickr
If we would just invade Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela the USA would have plenty of resources and we can tell the rest of the liberal world to pound sand.
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Than an additional million that have died as a result of our invasion? Good question. We killed a million to save hundreds of thousands.
This statement was never false.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed.
Maybe the same applies to all the world the problems you attribute to the rise of atheism. The shackles of an oppressive dictatorship are being removed, and for a while people will experience trouble getting used to their new-found freedom.
Brady Kelly wrote:
Maybe the same applies to all the world the problems you attribute to the rise of atheism. The shackles of an oppressive dictatorship are being removed, and for a while people will experience trouble getting used to their new-found freedom.
America's shackles were removed over 200 years ago. Liberalism is slowly reapplying them.
-
K(arl) wrote:
killing tenths of millions of its own people
Isn't a tenth of a million 100,000?
-
Brady Kelly wrote:
Maybe the same applies to all the world the problems you attribute to the rise of atheism. The shackles of an oppressive dictatorship are being removed, and for a while people will experience trouble getting used to their new-found freedom.
America's shackles were removed over 200 years ago. Liberalism is slowly reapplying them.
I somewhat tongue-in-cheek meant the shackles of organised religion on the whole world, not just America. At national level our shackles were removed in 1994. I italicise our because before then my white skin meant very few shackles except for Christian National Education[^], but I was already educated by 1994.
-
No, based on his reply to me, he actually believes that bullshit.
Stunning
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
-
I think then that you are a responsible consumer, but you probably do not represent the average North American. For instance, most supermarkets here only carry chinese garlic. It takes 2 weeks to one month to get it here, and it is half rotten when we buy it. I found a place where they have local garlic, and the difference is amazing, and it does not cost more, especially since I just threw the chinese one in the trash.
Rob Graham wrote:
I'll even stoop to the occasional Canadian or French import...
:->
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
ive found a few grocery stores around my town that sell only local foods, either from the county, or the state. ive head that local produce is better for people with allegries.
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Do you care about Iraqi lives?
Truth is the subjection of reality to an individuals perception
fat_boy wrote:
Do you care about Iraqi lives?
I think a nuke would have been more convenient.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Than an additional million that have died as a result of our invasion? Good question. We killed a million to save hundreds of thousands.
This statement was never false.
The need of the many outweighs the need of the few. Or was it the other way around? I forget...
-- Broadcast simultaneously one year in the future
-
fat_boy wrote:
Do you care about Iraqi lives?
I think a nuke would have been more convenient.
-
Bush Warns U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq Would Destabilize Mideast[^]. Of course, the US invasion did not.
Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first Fold with us! ¤ flickr
And we all know, the best thing to do with spilled wine is to let it soak into the carpet and just leave a stain. It's pointless to argue over the fact that it shouldn't have been spilled in the first place. Instead, figure out the best way to clean it up. -- modified at 15:20 Wednesday 29th August, 2007 [spelling]
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peart -
And we all know, the best thing to do with spilled wine is to let it soak into the carpet and just leave a stain. It's pointless to argue over the fact that it shouldn't have been spilled in the first place. Instead, figure out the best way to clean it up. -- modified at 15:20 Wednesday 29th August, 2007 [spelling]
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peart -
Without acknowledging the mistakes of the past, it would be like building a house on quicksand.
You acknowledge your mistake by fixing it, not by running away from the problem and thinking about what you should have done in the first place.
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peart -
You acknowledge your mistake by fixing it, not by running away from the problem and thinking about what you should have done in the first place.
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peartbrianwelsch wrote:
hinking about what you should have done in the first place.
It could be a good idea anyway to avoid to make the same mistake again. Do you really think that the vision of your president over Iran is different than the one he had over Irak?
-
brianwelsch wrote:
hinking about what you should have done in the first place.
It could be a good idea anyway to avoid to make the same mistake again. Do you really think that the vision of your president over Iran is different than the one he had over Irak?
I don't discount that we should learn to avoid making the same mistake twice. I'm saying that endlessly debating that lesson shouldn't keep you from trying to fix what is now wrong. In other words, saying we should never have gone into Iraq is a moot point, except when looking at things from an historical perspective. I don't know where the Iran issue is going. I don't think both ignoring Iran and leaving Iraq would make for a good scene.
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peart