Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 07 Dec '14 14:01
    http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2014/12/05/reckless-congress-declares-war-on-russia/

    Our only supposed representatives for a limited government have voted to encourage the Ukraine to attack Putin as well as arm those in the Ukraine.

    This is pretty much the only good the GOP is, increasing the size and scope of government to fight foreign wars abroad.

    Meanwhile, the GOP takes steps to secure amnesty and ignore Obamacare.
  2. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    07 Dec '14 19:45 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2014/12/05/reckless-congress-declares-war-on-russia/

    Our only supposed representatives for a limited government have voted to encourage the Ukraine to attack Putin as well as arm those in the Ukraine.

    This is pretty much the only good the GOP is, increasing the size and scope of government to fight foreign wars abroad.

    Meanwhile, the GOP takes steps to secure amnesty and ignore Obamacare.
    Have you gone bonkers?

    All of that is a distortion of the GOP position of Ukraine's right to self-defense, of which the Obama Democrats idea of supplying only blankets to them is of no help.

    You seem to overlook the fact that the GOP is taking steps to pass legislation to secure the borders to stop illegal immigration and plan to repeal or replace Obamacare as soon as they can get Obama out of office. They are also bringing a lawsuit against Obama for attempting to by-pass Congress in violation of the US Constitution.

    In an emotional address to Congress, Mr. Poro­shenko described Ukraine as fighting for Western democratic values as well as its own survival, and he all but begged for U.S. military aid beyond the token “non-lethal” supplies the Obama administration has provided. “One cannot win the war with blankets,” he said. “Even more, we cannot keep the peace with a blanket.”

    Mr. Obama’s answer was to offer another batch of blankets: non-lethal equipment amounting to $46 million, a rounding error in the Pentagon’s budget. Instead of the antitank weapons and drones the Ukrainian army desperately needs, it was promised more body armor, engineering equipment and patrol boats. That will be worthless against the thousands of regular Russian troops, backed by tanks, artillery and sophisticated antiaircraft systems, that moved into eastern Ukraine last month.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/provide-ukraine-with-the-military-aid-it-needs-to-deter-russias-aggression/2014/09/19/dd4bba46-400f-11e4-9587-5dafd96295f0_story.html
  3. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    07 Dec '14 22:20
    That’s why legislation approved Thursday by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee makes sense. It would strengthen sanctions against Russia and provide Ukraine with $350 million in military aid in 2015, including the weapons it needs to counter Russian armor.
    Looks to me like someone wants the US to get involved in a war with Russia.

    Ukraine has the same right to self defence et al that the Palestinians have. Will the Senate Foreign Relations Committee be recommending military aid commensurate with the challenge faced by Palestinians in the face of overwhelming odds? No because the aggressor is using American equipment paid for by Americans and the unwanted immigrants include many American citizens. Never mind.

    Anyway, ignoring rights which is what Americans do unless it suits their convenience, why is it America's job to go around arming people in distant lands for wars with their neighbours?

    These guys are mad warmongers.
  4. 07 Dec '14 22:27
    Originally posted by finnegan
    That’s why legislation approved Thursday by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee makes sense. It would strengthen sanctions against Russia and provide Ukraine with $350 million in military aid in 2015, including the weapons it needs to counter Russian armor.
    Looks to me like someone wants the US to get involved in a war with Russia.

    Ukr ...[text shortened]... arming people in distant lands for wars with their neighbours?

    These guys are mad warmongers.
    Oh for hells sake, without the USA this world would be in crappy shape, we respond to every natural disaster that comes along, with aircraft carriers that have complete modern hospitals, fresh water, and almost everything needed to help. tell me who helps more than the good old USA?
    The Tsunami in Indonesia and japan, who was there, quickly,, why the good old US of A. Next up Haiti, who was there, not only the military of the US of A, the American people showed up in droves to help. unfortunately a lot of the money donated was squandered by corrupt people. Ya we sure do ignore rights, and you are a fool
    for saying that.
  5. 07 Dec '14 23:32
    Originally posted by Hugh Glass
    Oh for hells sake, without the USA this world would be in crappy shape, we respond to every natural disaster that comes along, with aircraft carriers that have complete modern hospitals, fresh water, and almost everything needed to help. tell me who helps more than the good old USA?
    The Tsunami in Indonesia and japan, who was there, quickly,, why the goo ...[text shortened]... squandered by corrupt people. Ya we sure do ignore rights, and you are a fool
    for saying that.
    Sure, every time there is an earthquake or other natural disaster, out come the taxpayers money to help them out. Every time there is a war around the world, out come the money of the taxpayers to make it all nice again.


    Got it. Keep up the good work.
  6. 07 Dec '14 23:35
    Originally posted by RJHinds

    You seem to overlook the fact that the GOP is taking steps to pass legislation to secure the borders to stop illegal immigration and plan to repeal or replace Obamacare as soon as they can get Obama out of office. They are also bringing a lawsuit against Obama for attempting to by-pass Congress in violation of the US Constitution.

    [quote] In an emotional ...[text shortened]... -it-needs-to-deter-russias-aggression/2014/09/19/dd4bba46-400f-11e4-9587-5dafd96295f0_story.html[/b]
    I see a lot of talk. What I see is Obama getting away with pretty much everything, which will leave terrible precedents for the next President to follow. What I see is the further destruction of checks and balances in the system, while the GOP is too concerned to address them for fear of not getting votes in 2016.

    Do you really think the GOP will do squat to stop illegal immigration? Really? Do you think they will over turn Obamacare? Really?

    Pfft.
  7. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    08 Dec '14 03:26
    Originally posted by whodey
    I see a lot of talk. What I see is Obama getting away with pretty much everything, which will leave terrible precedents for the next President to follow. What I see is the further destruction of checks and balances in the system, while the GOP is too concerned to address them for fear of not getting votes in 2016.

    Do you really think the GOP will do squa ...[text shortened]... top illegal immigration? Really? Do you think they will over turn Obamacare? Really?

    Pfft.
    Maybe. It is certain that the Democrats will not do anything but make it worse.
  8. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    08 Dec '14 11:36
    Originally posted by Hugh Glass
    Oh for hells sake, without the USA this world would be in crappy shape, we respond to every natural disaster that comes along, with aircraft carriers that have complete modern hospitals, fresh water, and almost everything needed to help. tell me who helps more than the good old USA?
    The Tsunami in Indonesia and japan, who was there, quickly,, why the goo ...[text shortened]... squandered by corrupt people. Ya we sure do ignore rights, and you are a fool
    for saying that.
    You are dismally ill informed to spout this nationalistic fantasy without irony.

    Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, "extraordinary rendition", drone attacks over Pakistan, i could fill a page. US support for allies like Saudi Arabia entails tolerating weekly beheadings, infantilising of women, ... direct support for Islamic fundamentalism. US supported Israel in undermining secular Palestinian opponents in Al Fatah and funding its Islamist rivals, including Hamas.

    Henry Kissinger, the great American diplomat with very much right wing credentials, has produced a fascinating book entitled "World Order" in which he points out that the US has a very dangerous commitment to the notion that it is in possession of one right way to conduct affairs, and claims the (God given) mandate to impose this by force around the globe.

    One of many explorations of US imperialism is in some films: available at www.thoughtmaybe.com/the-power-principle

    The Power Principle — Corporate Empire and The Rise of the National Security State

    A series of films examining the history of the United States and the building of its empire with particular emphasis on the last seventy years of United States foreign policy. The methods that make empire possible are also examined — the politics of fear, the rise of public relations, the ‘Mafia Principle’ and the reoccurring use of fabled enemies, contrasting the Soviet Union and the Cold War alongside the parallels of today with the “War On Terror”. Not only does The Power Principle tie together historical events to revive a common thread, the series may also encourage viewers to reconsider their understanding of historical events and the portrayal of them, showing how those in power play a role in manipulating the collective memory through generations.

    Series

    Part 1 — Empire
    Part one introduces the elements of the United States empire and reviews the relationship between the war machine, Wall Street, the military and the government. The interlocking relationships between weapons manufacturers and presidential appointees like Warren Christopher for instance, clearly point to the direct connections between war, economics and empire. Other examples of how corporations run the United States are also detailed: Kermit Roosevelt’s role in overthrowing Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran, the merger of state and corporate power in Guatemala, economic neocolonialism in the Congo, the “Mafia Doctrine” in Grenada, Chile and elsewhere, the friendly relations between bankers like Prescott Bush and the Nazi regime in Germany; the hiring of certain Nazis after World War II by the United States, the re-installation of fascists into government in Italy and Greece after the war to prevent the rise of the communists; and so on.

    Part 2 — Propaganda
    Part two shows how power elites use propaganda and the manipulation of media and information for social control. The episode explains the concept of ‘self-deception, blowback and shifting rationales’ as part of the propaganda mindset, making examples of techniques used to manipulate popular opinion, which also serve to mask covert operations and secret military projects such as events in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Haiti. The episode also details the NSC-68 agreement which was a top-secret plan to quadruple defence spending from 1950, and embark on an elaborate propaganda campaign to convince the public to support future costly developments as part of the Cold War. President Truman orders the development of the hydrogen bomb. After this, NATO is purposed to maintain and expand the growing US empire. Case Studies: The Pentagon as a Keynsian economic Mechanism; Fear-based conditioning — The War of the Worlds, Television: The perfect propaganda medium; Soviet vs. American propaganda; Hollywood and the Pentagon; Psywarriors and the media; Operation Mockingbird; The Pentagon Pundits; Project Revere; The Bomber Gap.

    Part 3 — Apocalypse
    This last episode provides an overview of the United States empire post-Cold War, in the expanded age of nuclear weapons with the continued campaign of Mutually Assured Destruction. The Soviet Union has collapsed, and nothing has changed as far as the military-industrial complex is concerned, while the agreement between the two political parties in the United States over empire is stronger than ever before, meaning there is literally no difference in the way US foreign policy is conducted regardless of whoever ‘wins’ the White House. Additionally, the presence of the US military in civilian life has never been greater. This final episode details terrorist attacks planned and enacted by the United States against Cuba and elsewhere, showing methods of biological and chemical warfare, the Cuban Missile Crisis; while also detailing the efforts of people such as Vasili Arkhipov and Stanislav Petrov who averted catastrophic nuclear war on separate occasions. NATO is expanded. What about the future? Case Studies: Yugoslavia, Libya; the Yeltsin coup, etc.


    Get informed. The notion of the US as a City on the Hill (Reagan's term) is a delusion and a dangerous fantasy.
  9. 08 Dec '14 12:31
    Originally posted by Hugh Glass
    Oh for hells sake, without the USA this world would be in crappy shape, we respond to every natural disaster that comes along, with aircraft carriers that have complete modern hospitals, fresh water, and almost everything needed to help. tell me who helps more than the good old USA?
    The Tsunami in Indonesia and japan, who was there, quickly,, why the goo ...[text shortened]... squandered by corrupt people. Ya we sure do ignore rights, and you are a fool
    for saying that.
    The US provides relatively little foreign development aid. The OECD provides a list of development aid as a percentage of gross national income, in which the US ranks among the bottom half of OECD members, just below Portugal.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governments_by_development_aid#Official_development_assistance_by_country_as_a_percentage_of_Gross_National_Income_in_2013

    I could not quickly find data for disaster relief in general, but I did find data specific for the 2004 tsunami. Here, perhaps unsurprisingly because of close proximity, the Australians were the most generous on average. The US here also does not appear to come across as particularly generous, ranking far below e.g. Norway.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanitarian_response_to_the_2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake
  10. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    08 Dec '14 16:28
    Originally posted by finnegan
    US imperialism


    More "creative" word choices from the dictionary gestapo
  11. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    08 Dec '14 19:18 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung


    More "creative" word choices from the dictionary gestapo
    We are expected to accept US ways of using language, which differ sharply from the way it is used over here. You seem ill equipped for debate with people living outside the shadow of US ideology. Again, as long as the use of language conforms with widespread usage then there is no "gestapo" or misuse for you to complain about. You just display terribly restricted comprehension.

    By the way what is this "dictionary Gestapo" you whine about? If a dictionary cannot be used to establish the correct usage of a word or phrase, then what would you recommend instead?
  12. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    08 Dec '14 20:37 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by finnegan
    We are expected to accept US ways of using language, which differ sharply from the way it is used over here. You seem ill equipped for debate with people living outside the shadow of US ideology. Again, as long as the use of language conforms with widespread usage then there is no "gestapo" or misuse for you to complain about. You just display terribly r ...[text shortened]... used to establish the correct usage of a word or phrase, then what would you recommend instead?
    Who is our Emperor?

    The British know what Empire is. Its that thing Britain used to be when Victoria was an Empress. Don't play like the word means something different over there.
  13. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    08 Dec '14 21:04
    Originally posted by finnegan
    We are expected to accept US ways of using language, which differ sharply from the way it is used over here. You seem ill equipped for debate with people living outside the shadow of US ideology. Again, as long as the use of language conforms with widespread usage then there is no "gestapo" or misuse for you to complain about. You just display terribly r ...[text shortened]... used to establish the correct usage of a word or phrase, then what would you recommend instead?
    A different dictionary. Or wikipedia.

    Just because YOUR dictionary doesn't seem to agree with my use of the word 'fascist' doesn't mean I am wrong. But it is so audacious, so full of chutzpah, for you to twist words like 'racist', 'Empire', 'colonizing' and then whine about how others use 'fascism', that I can't resist the urge to point it out.
  14. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    08 Dec '14 21:20 / 1 edit
    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Empire

    Empire

    Actually it is just a place ruled by an emperor. Sometimes they are used incorrectly e.g Red Empire in Eastern Europe, the Persian Empire e.t.c

    It is often used now to define one country which forces other countries to serve it by force and oppresion, this I would not put as a correct term as it includes superpowers and would therefore make this term invalid.


    See? The dictionary says you are wrong. So does Wikipedia:

    wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_empires
  15. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    08 Dec '14 22:03 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    [quote]http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Empire

    Empire

    Actually it is just a place ruled by an emperor. Sometimes they are used incorrectly e.g Red Empire in Eastern Europe, the Persian Empire e.t.c

    It is often used now to define one country which forces other countries to serve it by force and oppresion, this I would not put as ...[text shortened]... ee? The dictionary says you are wrong. So does Wikipedia:

    wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_empires
    this I would not put as a correct term

    A personal opinion then, from a source that need not be accepted as definitive, but not relevant to the question as the term is in widespread use in the way that I have used it. You are not required to agree with this usage - merely to recognise that it is there.

    More importantly, this is not a personal usage on my part - I am adopting terms that are used widely.

    BTW referring to me as the dictionary gestapo in the face of this bizarre piece of equivocation from you is just beyond irony.