RE: Giving up war?

RE: Giving up war? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

philosophy -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 12:42:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 N.G. so, the "U.N." screwed you guys too eh? ...to be fair Popeye, in this case the UN was the voice of reason. It was Blair and Bush who lied to us and got us all into this meaningless, unproductive and wholly unwarranted war. The UN actually tried to keep things reasonable, tried to gather reliable evidence as opposed to the pack of lies we got told by our respective governments.

NorthernGent -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 1:19:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 N.G. so, the "U.N." screwed you guys too eh? No, the UN were putting a marker down along the lines of innocent until proven guilty........that old hallmark of English Liberalism; that which may have a bearing on the US.....when it suits, same with the English.

popeye1250 -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 2:34:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 N.G. so, the "U.N." screwed you guys too eh? ...to be fair Popeye, in this case the UN was the voice of reason. It was Blair and Bush who lied to us and got us all into this meaningless, unproductive and wholly unwarranted war. The UN actually tried to keep things reasonable, tried to gather reliable evidence as opposed to the pack of lies we got told by our respective governments. Phil, to be really fair the "U.N." had SEVENTEEN resolutions. One after another and nothing happened. Mitt Romney who's running for President was here yesterday and he thinks the U.S. should get out of the "U.N." I think he's right and judging by the crowds he's been attracting so do a lot of other people.

EPGAH -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 2:53:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....Epgah, i'm stil waiting for your explanation of how the English settled the US, and how the USA always treated fairly with the indigenous peoples there.....or, when caught in an untruth, do you always adopt the ostrich position? The US colonies, as we know them now, were settled PRIMARILY by people from Britain, in fact, they were even beholden to a joint-stock company (Proto-Corporation) called the LONDON Company, if I remember correctly? We dealt as fairly as we could with natives, paying them for the land we took over. I was always taught that the natives sometimes feared encroaching civiliation and razed a few settlements, this got the Americans mad, and we retaliated with our "superior technology" (I put that in quotes because there's not as much difference between musket and bow and arrow as there is between say, musket and machinegun...Shades of meaning, I suppose?) While we're at it, tell me how fairly Britain dealt with Africans, or India? Or is colonialism and conquest of inferior cultures a strictly American invention?

EPGAH -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 2:55:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Phil, to be really fair the "U.N." had SEVENTEEN resolutions. One after another and nothing happened. Mitt Romney who's running for President was here yesterday and he thinks the U.S. should get out of the "U.N." I think he's right and judging by the crowds he's been attracting so do a lot of other people. You mean have America make our own decisions, since "Peacekeeping" Missions almost always seem to end up involving American troops? Great idea, but it might or might not happen that way! [;)] Governments don't always do what the "people on the ground" want!

meatcleaver -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:01:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EPGAH quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Phil, to be really fair the "U.N." had SEVENTEEN resolutions. One after another and nothing happened. Mitt Romney who's running for President was here yesterday and he thinks the U.S. should get out of the "U.N." I think he's right and judging by the crowds he's been attracting so do a lot of other people. You mean have America make our own decisions, since "Peacekeeping" Missions almost always seem to end up involving American troops? Great idea, but it might or might not happen that way! [;)] Governments don't always do what the "people on the ground" want! Like what peace keeping missions?

meatcleaver -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:03:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EPGAH quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....Epgah, i'm stil waiting for your explanation of how the English settled the US, and how the USA always treated fairly with the indigenous peoples there.....or, when caught in an untruth, do you always adopt the ostrich position? The US colonies, as we know them now, were settled PRIMARILY by people from Britain, in fact, they were even beholden to a joint-stock company (Proto-Corporation) called the LONDON Company, if I remember correctly? We dealt as fairly as we could with natives, paying them for the land we took over. I was always taught that the natives sometimes feared encroaching civiliation and razed a few settlements, this got the Americans mad, and we retaliated with our "superior technology" (I put that in quotes because there's not as much difference between musket and bow and arrow as there is between say, musket and machinegun...Shades of meaning, I suppose?) While we're at it, tell me how fairly Britain dealt with Africans, or India? Or is colonialism and conquest of inferior cultures a strictly American invention? No one is denying British imperial shit. At least we know we were full of imperial shit and don't rationalise it. How about you?

MzMia -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:09:41 PM)
Well, all this talk about U.S. history, has me thinking. If we care about how people are treated so much, when are the descedants of slaves that where brought here against their will and freed with usually NOTHING...going to get their reparitions? I am the direct descedants of slaves, and I am thinking the Indians got a far better deal than the slaves did. I am not even going to bother talking about the Europeans in Africa. There is a common thread in history between Europe and the U.S.A. and even the blind can see it. Let's keep things real, here. Back to your normal programming.

EPGAH -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:34:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MzMia Well, all this talk about U.S. history, has me thinking. If we care about how people are treated so much, when are the descedants of slaves that where brought here against their will and freed with usually NOTHING...going to get their reparitions? I am the direct descedants of slaves, and I am thinking the Indians got a far better deal than the slaves did. I am not even going to bother talking about the Europeans in Africa. There is a common thread in history between Europe and the U.S.A. and even the blind can see it. Let's keep things real, here. Back to your normal programming. I know EXACTLY when the descendants of slaves will get reparations: Either A.) When the descendants of their former owners do--Correction, when the descendants of non-"connected" owners do--the ones who were around D.C. knew what was coming, and some of them even got a couple hundred bucks for each slave. The others were simply "divested" of their "property". Please remember, also, that most Americans didn't keep slaves. 10% of the population have always held 90% of the wealth, and back when people of a lesser culture were part of that "wealth", then some people owned an assload of slaves, and others owned a big fat ZERO slaves! That's why they wanted to keep California free: Slaveowners would have a lot of extra bodies mining, but the profits would goto the Master! That's not fair...life isn't fair...etc. Or B.) When the NAACP pays back every dime of Welfare, WIC, free lunches, and frivolous lawsuits they've ever received or filed! They'll be paying it back for another couple centuries! Mark your calendars for the 7th of Never! However, how will you count all the various permutations of partial black? How much of a fraction of their geneology must be black to qualify for the reparations? (Don't give me that "drop of blood" crack!) Would partials be eligible for the full amount, or just a prorated amount based on the percentages? Who would pay it? And most importantly, would the reparations be divided by the number alive now, or worse, MULTIPLIED by the greater numbers alive now? If the former, each one wouldn't get enough to buy a HappyMeal, if the latter, our Government couldn't afford it without a special tax....Either way, they'd create winners, losers, and more enmity! As a side-note, some plantation-owners *tried* enslaving Indians. HOWEVER, they were born and raised in the forest, and knew how to disappear into it...Ergo, a waste of time! P.S. My own ancestors weren't rich enough to earn slaves!Sniff[:(] Do I get "reparations" for the financial inequity in potential earnings between my family and the drastically increased earnings of families that owned slaves? (And some still do, we just call them "illegal aliens" now, and they're responsible for their OWN food and housing and behavior when not in use...more "fair" to the owners, less "fair" to the rest![;)]) If they ever did give the descendants of slaves "reparations", expect a LOT of claims like the above...And what about "free" blacks, or even people who just LOOK African-ish, who moved here AFTER slavery was abolished? Do you think they wouldn't ask for a piece'o'that?[;)]

ranrich -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:41:07 PM)
For those whose ancestors were slaves and think that some sort of reparations are in order. Question: If your ancestors had not been brought over as slaves, then you would be in some part of Africa now instead of the US. Would you like that?

EPGAH -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:43:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ranrich For those whose ancestors were slaves and think that some sort of reparations are in order. Question: If your ancestors had not been brought over as slaves, then you would be in some part of Africa now instead of the US. Would you like that? I had thought of that angle too, but that implies that Africa's culture is inherently inferior to our own...an attitude I've been called down for![;)]

MzMia -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 3:53:44 PM)
I like you EPGAH, you speak your mind and you are interesting. I may not agree with everything you say, but so what? I enjoy your presence here, glad you have started posting. I am proud and glad to be an American. There are very few countries I would rather have been born in. I am enjoying the dialogue. The main point I was making was that Americans and Europeans, have had very similar ways of doing things in the past. No need for the pot to call the kettle black.

farglebargle -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 4:02:02 PM)
quote: The US colonies, as we know them now, were settled PRIMARILY by people from Britain Even NIEU AMSTERDAM???

MzMia -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 4:09:57 PM)
LOL GOD save the queen!

EPGAH -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 4:31:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MzMia I like you EPGAH, you speak your mind and you are interesting. I may not agree with everything you say, but so what? I enjoy your presence here, glad you have started posting. I am proud and glad to be an American. There are very few countries I would rather have been born in. I am enjoying the dialogue. The main point I was making was that Americans and Europeans, have had very similar ways of doing things in the past. No need for the pot to call the kettle black. Thank you, MzMia! I'm glad you appreciate honesty, because it makes one VERY lonely out here on the "moral high ground"! And you seem to have made a less-overt statement of my own points: #1: If people find their old country better, they are welcome to stay there, with my blessing. That and several hundred dollars (Depending where they want to go) will get them a one-way ticket to MOST countries they might prefer over our own... #2: Where First World countries "invade" a third-world country, they bring knowledge...improvements: Roads, schools, sanitation, law&order, and eventually creature-comforts, like electricity, air-conditioning, phone, TV, Internet, etc.--the latter not being necessary to LIVE, but an important part of MODERN life--in fact, some might even say they're hallmarks of First World living, that "everyone" aspires to! #3: Third world cultures seem to be wracked by overpopulation, disease, violence and an addiction to "help" from the First World, but BRISTLE at any suggestion they should clean up their act! P.S. #4: Third world countries believe in "solving" their social/economic problems by sending their excesses to the First World nations. Either they TRULY believe the First World has no better expenditure of resources than to babysit their excesses...Or, as in recent years, that the First World is somehow "morally obligated" to provide for third-worlders on a preferential basis--above their OWN citizens! (Oh, you don't need schools or research, you need to spend more food&money taking care of our people invading your country...and don't you DARE suggest we slow down on breeding them! See #3) #5: Despite #3, they have no compunction about telling the First World how to run THEIR affairs, basically trying to make the First World country run the way the third-worlders' original country was--even though "their ways" were what put/kept that third world country in the crapper to begin with!

philosophy -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 5:15:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EPGAH We dealt as fairly as we could with natives, paying them for the land we took over. I was always taught that the natives sometimes feared encroaching civiliation and razed a few settlements, this got the Americans mad, and we retaliated with our "superior technology" ..oh dear.....you really have no idea of your own country's history do you....perhaps this link will help educate you. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/dwe/16338.htm "The United States government's inability and unwillingness to abide by its treaty obligations with Indian tribes was clearly related to an insatiable demand for cheap land for European settlers........Whether the system of Indian treaties were ever meant to work is a matter of debate, but in reality, most Indian treaties were broken." ...you and i clearly have a different interpretation of what the phrase 'fairly' means. Your government didn't pay for all the land they took over and frequently broke its own promises. BTW, the link is from your own State Department. i don't know who taught you your nations history, but they were wrong.

EPGAH -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 5:39:46 PM)
And I suppose all other countries abide by their treaties and/or boundaries except America? You should tell my neighbor that...she keeps bringing her dogs onto MY lawn! Worse, she's ugly! [;)] The only alternative would be birth-control and "reproductive fascism", right? Remember, that was BEFORE the Pope said that condoms were OK--for disease-prevention purposes, NOT contraception! But then again, birth-control wasn't around back then... Let's also view it from the Americans' point of view: Empty land, a few savages, expand or perish! (This was also before crop-rotation was known, so more land was needed for farming--for SURVIVAL!) I bet the savages were laughing at us...what were we thinking, establishing such heavy structures that couldn't be moved? It's almost like we intended to PERMANENTLY STAY! However, our "stupid" immobile structures were also immobile in the face of an enemy army, who might have been incited by the French--or even the British--to attack the colonists, to PREVENT us from spreading, but it actually just encouraged us...Call it the "pioneer spirit" if you will...Also, the savages, for as long as they'd been there, hadn't established a viable civilization--if we were able to "wipe them out" so easily...How is that? Oh, and I was disqualified for military service, so I am innocent...And most people act like this all happened over 200 years ago! Some Indians even intermarried with their American conquerors...did we seduce them with magic or technology? (Did we Blind Them With Science?[;)]) Or money-hypnosis--or does that go back to the "dark magic" category? Also remember, our closest enemy, Mexico, was "conquered" by Spain first...I think I mentioned that in a previous post?

LadyEllen -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 6:09:24 PM)
hang about Epgah - "disqualified for military service"? I'm sure I recall you saying you'd served, and discussed it briefly with Thompsonx? And I cant imagine the descendants of the natives - several of whom are present on the boards here, appreciating the description of their ancestors as "savages", nor the accusation that their civilisation wasnt viable. Lets face it, in just about 400 years, we've pretty much trashed the place where they managed to live for far longer. Might have to look up on crop rotation too; pretty sure it was well known pre-industrial revolution at least, a time when half the country was still occupied by "savages" making a decent living out of it. E

philosophy -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 7:14:51 PM)
.......oh, so now you change your tune...you've gone from saying that the USA treated fairly the indigenous people there to a tacit acknowledgment that they, in fact, treated them dishonourably. i believe the phrase used in USA to describe such hypocrisy is to flip flop. You've been caught in an untruth, though to be fair you may not have known it at the time. Now you do........an honourable person would acknowledge their mistake as a mistake. As to your remarks regarding 'savages' and 'viable civilisation'......they merely denote a stunning lack of understanding at best, and at worst......well, let's say a wilful desire to not understand those different to you and leave it at that, eh?

philosophy -> RE: Giving up war? (10/19/2007 7:16:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Might have to look up on crop rotation too; pretty sure it was well known pre-industrial revolution at least, a time when half the country was still occupied by "savages" making a decent living out of it. E ...i believe archeology has confirmed that crop rotation is a stone age technology.

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 [8] 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.589844E-02