Originally posted by eddie andersAll this shows is that the Rangers require powerful mandate to have any supporters. If they were truly great, no command would be required 😛.
support glasgow rangers.
Kidding.
I would do the standard power thing and worry about my re-election/appointment/opinion polls as soon as I got into office, cave in to the whims of the ill-informed, and randomly arrest people on flimsy evidence. I would be sure to create a largely imagined public enemy from some unfortunate incident, and parlay that into huge absolute power. Then I'd show my true ineffectuality by making slow-witted decisions and replacing initial decisive action with slow and agonizing incompetence and poor planning. Then I'd start calling myself by my middle initial. "Hi all. You can just call me Big F. You better do what I say or your ass is gonna get run over by a tank..."
All right. Enough of that.
Someone should write a little essay called "If Russ Ran the World".
Originally posted by royalchickenMy, My! Aren't we effervescent this morning! How do you really feel about war, Mark? Don't hold back... we want to know.
All this shows is that the Rangers require powerful mandate to have any supporters. If they were truly great, no command would be required 😛.
Kidding.
I would do the standard power thing and worry about my re-election/appointment/opinion polls as soon as I got into office, cave in to the whims of the ill-informed, and randomly arrest people on f ...[text shortened]... ght. Enough of that.
Someone should write a little essay called "If Russ Ran the World".
Hehe 🙂. I won't answer unless you promise immunity in the event of potential hijacking.....😉
Seriously, I think war is such a serious, costly, and devastating matter that bandying it about on short notice and with motives that are generally so unclear and poorly planned as to pale before the clear and majour motive, titillating the public, is irresponsible. There exist legal mechanisms for deciding reasonably when war is necessary, and having 535 people (remember that large groups tend to have more sedate and inactive opinions than individuals--a strength of democracy. The basic stupidity of groups compared to individuals is a weakness) be swayed and informed by knowledgeable parties is a much better decision-making practice than having a lower primate in a cowboy hat wax belligerent before a bootlicking multitude. The US government hasn't formally declared war since World War Deuce, and conspicuously that was the last war that they had any real moral justification for participating in.
Note that I am not counting Gulf War 1 because the US was part of an international coalition protecting a legal treaty. Korea was the UN's action, and not the US's. But Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan, etc. were all illegal and immoral in my view.
I have talked about war enough in a sensible way in other threads and felt a rant was in order here. I don't want yet another argument about war, although you feel free to do so with the others.
Lastly, I strongly feel that people need to respect international law that is well-written and coherently formulated above all else. If I were the ruler, I would make such a thing, with the aid of many others, and then abdicate.
Originally posted by royalchickenDo you know who set the precident for bypassing the constitution? (which states... "only congreff shall have the power to wage war"... Johnson. Viet Nam. Demo Congress. First time... but used ever since.
Hehe 🙂. I won't answer unless you promise immunity in the event of potential hijacking.....😉
Seriously, I think war is such a serious, costly, and devastating matter that bandying it about on short notice and with motives that are generally so unclear and poorly planned as to pale before the clear and majour motive, titillating the public, is irr ...[text shortened]... f I were the ruler, I would make such a thing, with the aid of many others, and then abdicate.
Originally posted by royalchickenLeagallity? hmmm. Which is most important to people under the thumb of a dictator? Legal or Moral?
Hehe 🙂. I won't answer unless you promise immunity in the event of potential hijacking.....😉
Seriously, I think war is such a serious, costly, and devastating matter that bandying it about on short notice and with motives that are generally so unclear and poorly planned as to pale before the clear and majour motive, titillating the public, is irr ...[text shortened]... f I were the ruler, I would make such a thing, with the aid of many others, and then abdicate.
Originally posted by royalchickenAfghanistan. Hmmmm. This is like Evolution vs. Creation... lay aside all issues but being a human... in afghanistan. can yo go to the sports stadium on saturday, as people did for 17 years and watch women beheaded because of a supposed wrong to islam? Just curious.
Hehe 🙂. I won't answer unless you promise immunity in the event of potential hijacking.....😉
Seriously, I think war is such a serious, costly, and devastating matter that bandying it about on short notice and with motives that are generally so unclear and poorly planned as to pale before the clear and majour motive, titillating the public, is irr ...[text shortened]... f I were the ruler, I would make such a thing, with the aid of many others, and then abdicate.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI was not making any statements about the Democratic or Republican ideologies. What counts in war is very careful, balanced, and rational consideration about when to fight.
Do you know who set the precident for bypassing the constitution? (which states... "only congreff shall have the power to wage war"... Johnson. Viet Nam. Demo Congress. First time... but used ever since.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyMike, I abhor that as much as you do. But strictly speaking it is not the affair of the US government to intervene. Other places have human rights records far worse, and the US has not done anything. That is why that argument is fallacious. Was the US invading Rwanda to stop the genocide? No. Why? They didn't have any motive that they considered worthwhile. Has the political climate changed in 8 years to the extent that the US invades places soley because of their human righs abuses? Clearly not. Why did the US invade Afghanistan? I don't know. I do know, however, that the American public was in a state of total jingoistic blood lust around the time of that "war". I also know that the measured public approval of government action at the time was high, and criticism was lax. Some brave face would clearly have furthered the goal of certain US officials, namely to be re-elected. So you draw your own conclusions.
Afghanistan. Hmmmm. This is like Evolution vs. Creation... lay aside all issues but being a human... in afghanistan. can yo go to the sports stadium on saturday, as people did for 17 years and watch women beheaded because of a supposed wrong to islam? Just curious.
Since you seem to make decisions reasonably, you will recognize that this is not like "Evolution vs. Creation" because there is not fundamental split in method. You are about to douse me in deductively valid and empirically supported arguments saying I'm wrong. I look forward to it 🙂