RE: Who Most Threatens America?

RE: Who Most Threatens America? (Full Version)

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

Message

UtopianRanger -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 1:15:56 AM)
quote: Who Most Threatens America? I haven't clicked on the link yet.... but I'll say in no certain order : 1}Aristocrats 2 }Pseudo-aristocrats 3} Lawyers {eighty percent of them should be converted into engineers} - Contrary to popular belief…. They are not needed to propel the social aspects of thinking. 4}Lawyer-turned-politicians 5}International bankers 6}Career bureaucrats 7} Aristocratic-CEO-mentality 8} Corporations that are any part of the military industrial complex. - R

seeksfemslave -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 2:07:47 AM)
The fast food industry doesnt help. The point above about Lawyers I agree with 5 million percent. I think that there should be a limit on the number of any profession getting into a given legislature. Career politicians, never, ie need at least 10 years working outside politics first. Preferably the types who have worked their way up or started their own business. Sorry Utopian I see I repeated two points you had already made ! Still it proves we must be right !

philosophy -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 2:54:50 AM)
Mercnbeth.......thanks for that link in particular.......most informative. Over here the gist of things is reported but that was a nicely detailed piece. Over in the friendly fire thread there has been some discussion of when justice has to be seen to be done, although no-one is arguing that some classification may be needed from time to time to protect active operations. While it is extraordinarily welcome that the prisoners at GB will now not be physically tortured, it is saddening that this was an issue that needed clarification. However, appalling as the torture of prisoners is, that wasn't the real objection to guantanamo. It is the holding without trial or without being charged that rankles. i utterly accept that the prisoners are not being killed....as you pointed out they are merely detained......however in the (deeply unofficial) court of international opinion thats not really the point. You said that many there have made statements that would get them arrested under UK law. This may be true, but the evidence would need to be tested in a court of law. Until then, if we are to apply the usual test of western legal systems we must consider them innocent until proved guilty. The fact that the US government continues to deny such a basic right to these individuals is the problem. GB is held up as an example of american justice and as such almost certainly breeds opposition. i know for a fact that among ordinary joes in the UK GBay makes america at best a laughing stock, or at worst any mention of it brings forth the response 'that Bush is a nutter, world war 3 coming up'. Such blatant disregard for what many consider basic human rights doesn't make america any worse than a rogue state calling for the destruction of another state......it makes america exactly the same as them. Thats what i consider the major threat to american security. It's seeming inability to hold the moral or ethical high ground when it really counts; which i believe may arise as a consequence of putting american interests, and therefore american viewpoints, so far ahead of other interests or views that they may as well not exist. You mentioned the recent alleged hijacking attempt. Most people i know here think it was probably not some conspiracy, but a genuine security success. However we are awaiting the trial to be sure. Until that trial the arrested people are merely alleged conspirators. They are innocent until proven guilty. Finally, i really am not trying to engage in america-bashing. i lived there for a while and enjoyed many things about he society. A couple of things did worry me, including (you're almost certain to guess) the casual racism i encountered that didnt seem to be socially unacceptable. But america can be exactly what it dreams itself to be, i just wish it didnt keep shooting itself in the foot. All im trying to do is suggest theres a safety catch on that gun.

caitlyn -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 6:58:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy .....Mercnbeth clearly understood and argued with me based on what i'd said Caitlyn. It was an exercise in logic. You however have clearly not understood what i was getting at.....once you apply some logic to my thesis i will gladly answer it. I understand completely what you are saying philosophy ... I just don't agree with it. I do not feel that because I used history as it relates to America, in a post entitled "Who Most Threatens America?", that indicates that I'm only thinking of things as it applies to America. You put that label on me, and quite frankly, you don't know me well enough to even begin to make that sort of assumption. We are posters on a message board. You don't know a fucking thing about how I feel, other than from a few words on a board, and vice versa. So, you can persist in thinking that anyone that doesn't agree with you, doesn't understand you, but that doesn't make it so.

LaTigresse -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 7:04:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom People who believe there are simple answers for complex problems. Exactly........America is its own worst enemy.

philosophy -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 7:25:52 AM)
ok Caitlyn.......i based my criticism of your posts on what i percieved as a non-understanding of my point. In all honesty i don't expect you to agree with me, just understand what i was saying. i take you at your word that you actually did get my point. As to me saying that you were 'only thinking of things as it applies to America', i based that assertion on your earlier statements. If i misinterpreted them i apologise.

caitlyn -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 12:07:35 PM)
No worries philosophy. [:D] Sometimes I think we could all stand to remember that just because someone posts an idea on this board, that doesn't by default mean it's an idea they agree with, or even support. They may be pointing out alternatives, for the purpose of discussion. Iraq is a very good and illustrative example. My personal "opinion" is that it was pretty darn stupid to get involved over there ... but those are just my feelings, and really don't represent reality. War sucks ... people get killed in wars. I don't want to be killed, so it's only reasonable to not want other people to get killed either. BUT ... if a person is going to be objective, they just have to admit the possibility that any of the following may exist. 1. The goal, may have been to get an American army in Iraq. If that was the goal, then clearly the goal was successful. A person may not like that goal, but that is completely different from claiming there is no goal, and the goal wasn't accomplished. 2. The goal may be only partially accomplished. The President seem to think this, and has stated it many times. While I'm not inclined to believe him, I'm also not inclined to dismiss him. A reasonal point of view might be to let things play out. 3. There may be no exit strategy, because there was never any intention of exiting in the first place. 4. The army can win the battles, but can't win the peace (this being used by some here to make the assumption that the army is not doing well, and not effective, or is "worn out"). It may be that there was never any intention of winning the peace. If we won the peace, everyone would want to the army to come home. It may just be that the powers that be, don't want the army to come home. It may also be the case that they prefer soldiers fighting those we call terrorists in Iraq, to having these same people blow up things here in America. Now, people might not agree with that, but again, that is a completely different discussion. 5. The powers that be, might just see fifty causualties a month as acceptable to accomplish the goal, whatever that goal may be. A person may not agree with that, but that is completely different from claiming failure because of fifty casualties. More people die on the highways of Houston and vicinity every month. Sad, but true. So ... I think we would all be well served to not state our opinions as if they were absolutes ... and be open minded enough to look at things for what they are ... rather than what we wish they were, and hope they are. Peace ... cc

CrappyDom -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 12:57:53 PM)
quote: quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom People who believe there are simple answers for complex problems. Complex problems often have simple answers. I remember once solving a four page math problem. The answer was 1. I was thinking about this one as it bugged me. The answer was only one after you slowly solved one bit at a time. You did not look at a four page problem and at a glance see the answer as one. You combined many answers and slowly came to a final solution of 1. In other words, through the application of many complicated and involved formulas and methods you solved the problem. In other words, there are no simple answers to complex problems but complex problems can be solved.

CrappyDom -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 1:09:23 PM)
Caitlyn, I realize you see everything far more clearly than us pathetic mortals but answer this for me. quote: 1. The goal, may have been to get an American army in Iraq. If that was the goal, then clearly the goal was successful. A person may not like that goal, but that is completely different from claiming there is no goal, and the goal wasn't accomplished. 3. There may be no exit strategy, because there was never any intention of exiting in the first place. Since among the rapidly changing reasons Bush has stated as the reason we invaded Iraq, the above two were specifically denied, wouldn't that make Bush a bigger liar than Clinton and a liar about a far more serious issue than a simple blowjob? quote: 4. The army can win the battles, but can't win the peace (this being used by some here to make the assumption that the army is not doing well, and not effective, or is "worn out"). If you are going to quote me (worn out) at least have the decency not to lie about the context in which I stated something. The FACT that the military is worn out has zero to do with whether it is or isn't winning anything and my comment was in relation to its ability to conduct ground combat in a third warzone against an intact military in Iran. quote: 5. The powers that be, might just see fifty causualties a month as acceptable to accomplish the goal, whatever that goal may be. A person may not agree with that, but that is completely different from claiming failure because of fifty casualties. More people die on the highways of Houston and vicinity every month. Sad, but true. You may be fine with losing 50 men and women a month and a hundred more with their arms or legs blown off but don't confuse that with why some of us see this fiasco as a disaster. It is a disaster because it has worn out the military, it has done more to help Iran than they ever could have hoped, it has made Al Queda stronger than ever, it created a massive training ground for terrorists, it has undermined every moderate voice in the Middle East, and has cost America directly hundreds of billions of dollars and trillions indirectly. Worst of all, it has made us vastly less safe and our enemies stronger, not exactly a good idea.

caitlyn -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 1:40:23 PM)
These were given as examples of possible talking points, offering differing opinions. This was clearly articulated. The points were only meant to be illustrative. You would be mistaken to assume these are positions I support.

FangsNfeet -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/7/2006 6:04:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: perverseangelic Who's the biggest threat? People who are willingly and willfully ignorant. Father Time is the biggest threat. As we look at history, all super powers rise and fall. Greece, Rome Italy, Poland, The Netherlands, Spain and England where all once known for being the most sophisticated and powerful nation in the world. How long can the USA hold out? Only time can tell.

TotalitarianFL -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/8/2006 1:54:09 AM)
The thing even worse than "the ignorant"... the unaware ignorant who is indoctrinated with anti-knowledge. Really, the American culture and nature in general is self-destructive though.

UtopianRanger -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/8/2006 3:37:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave The fast food industry doesnt help. The point above about Lawyers I agree with 5 million percent. I think that there should be a limit on the number of any profession getting into a given legislature. Career politicians, never, ie need at least 10 years working outside politics first. Preferably the types who have worked their way up or started their own business. Sorry Utopian I see I repeated two points you had already made ! Still it proves we must be right ! Yup... Just ponder for a moment what this nation would be like if the compensation to become some type of engineer was/is equal or greater than that of an attorney. Then extrapolate that a little further and make the projection that congress is filled with engineer-turned-politicians instead of what we have now. [8\|] As loosely interpreted from the writings of the great sage Thales : '' Nation filled with Politicians and Attorneys is nation of cannibals'' - R

CrappyDom -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/8/2006 4:01:15 PM)
Ranger, Congress is full of politicians because people believe you can increase the size of government and cut taxes and not run a deficit, or they believe that if you give everyone enough all problems will go away, or even that if we ignore the rest of the world, they will ignore us. Only politicians can create answer the vast idiotic majority are dumb enough to fall for. Engineers love math. They would do things like calculate the wealth of America, subtract out the annual trade deficit and announce the house of cards was in danger of collapsing. Or they would survey how much oil is in proven reserves, calculate in the rate and size of new oilfields being discovered and compare it to the growing demand for energy and realize that SUVs are not a good idea. Engineers are not going to come up with the sort of pablum that Joe Sixpack or Linda Bleedingheart is going to like.

NavyDDG54 -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/8/2006 10:33:51 PM)
There have no been no major terror attacks out side of Iraq? What about these(note the last few took place during the Iraq war against US interests abroad): Operation Desert 1(1979)- 8 Beirut Embassy Bombing(1983)- 17 Kuwiat Embassy Bombing(1983)- 6 Beirut Barracks Bombing(1983)- 241 Beirut Embassy Annex Bombing(1984)- 24 Hezbollah hijacking of Kuwait airline flght 221(1984)- 2 US citizens killed Hezbollah hijacking of TWA flight 847(1985)- 1 US sailor killed Cruise ship Achille Lauro hijacking(1985- 1 American killed Rome/Vienna Airport bombings(1986)- 5 Americans killed West Berlin Discotheque Bombing(1986)- 2 US Soldiers killed Beirut shootings(1986)- 3 Americans killed TWA Flight 840(1986)- 4 Americans killed Pan AM Flight 103(1988)- 270 World Trade Center Bombing(1993)- 6 US Military HQ in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia(1995)- 5 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia(1996)- 19 US troops killed US Embassies in Africa bombings(1998)- 224 USS Cole(2000)- 17 September 11, 2001- 3,339 American Consulate in Pakistan bombed(2002)- 12 Riyadh, SA housing complex bombings(2003)- 8 2004 Terror attacks in Saudi Arabia- 8 Amman, Jordan Hotel bombings(2005)- 57 Operation Enduring Freedom- 301 Operation Iraqi Freedom- 2,667 Total killed in War on Terror by the terrorists since 1979- 7,247. This is our war. This is for our survival. It did not start on 9-11. It started decades ago. Wake up.

philosophy -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/9/2006 6:46:08 AM)
"Total killed in War on Terror by the terrorists since 1979- 7,247." ...total number of civilians killed by America's strongest ally in the middle east, during a recent operation that had high level American political cover.....how many? ....total number of civilians killed by US funded right wing paramilitaries in south america....how many? .....if you only count american deaths then it is clearly easy to make the case that america is the victim here. If you count all deaths then the picture is less clear-cut. All deaths, on whatever side, generate strong emotions that often spill into violence. Until America counts a foreigners death as important as an americans death then America will fail to understand how the world actually works. This, i beleive, is a dangerous blind spot.

CrappyDom -> RE: Who Most Threatens America? (9/9/2006 8:16:54 AM)
NavyDDG54 quote: This is our war. This is for our survival. It did not start on 9-11. It started decades ago. Wake up. As a general note, if an enemy can't hurt you enough to notice, in fact, can't even defeat a tiny client state, how exactly are we fighting for our "survival"? In WWII, we had simultaneous ground combat operations on three out of the five major land masses on this planet and naval combat operations on and under every ocean and most of the seas. We lost single ships with more men on board in WWII than were lost on 9/11. We might be in a war but it certainly isn't for our survival and it is an insult to WWII vets to claim otherwise.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875