Originally posted by OmnislashActually, the greatest thing you can do is vote. You have that freedom to express your opinion because of the vote. Yes there is a lot wrong with the system, but it's still the greatest one around or people wouldn't be risking their lives to get here.
You raise a fair question that I would like to address. Somewhere along the line through propaganda some of our people have come under the illusion that to question the government is "un-patriotic". While I am happy to know that these people care about our country and wish to support it, these misguided individuals are in fact doing nothing short of gran ...[text shortened]... reatest thing you can do is speak your mind.
Best Regards,
Omnislash
You may speak your mind to influence people with your thoughts and if enough people agree with you, it becomes the law. There are still many countries where you can not openly speak your mind.
Regards,
Charlie
Originally posted by chaswrayApologies if I've upset people. It's not my fault that a lot of the major issues of the day involve the US. I thought it would be interesting to discuss these in an intelligent way. I've not been offensive to anyone as others have been in some posts i've read (always the sign that a person's arguments are weak). Lets take a few examples of what I think are fundamental issues in the world today:
I think it's more an indictment of posters who only post anti-American threads! Gets a little tiring after a while. It's like being at a party, and the same person keeps stating, in many diiferent ways, that your wife is ugly! You know she's ugly, but hey, it's your wife and you love her!
It is a valid question and the answer is an easy one...no, it can't be won.
Regards,
Charlie
Concerns about the environment - Very important I would have thought particularly to future generations. Is it a good idea to try to reach some kind of global accord on the best way forward to protect it? Was there a fundamental flaw with the Kyoto agreement? If not, isn't it irresponsible not to sign up for it.
The threat of international terrorism. There is clearly not a simple solution to this. The attack on the Trade Centre was a terrible thing and the natural reaction of any country would be to hit out at the perceived perpretrators (eg Afghanistan and Iraq). Any country has the right to defend it's citizens. The question is - What is the best way to do this? How far is it reasonable to go in denying people's human rights to achieve this end? Is it right for example to detain terrorist suspects indefinately without charge or a trial and deny them access to lawyers or family? (If this were done by totalitarian states we would rightly condemn them).
The Palestinian question - How can we help to solve it? Surely it is obvious that much of the terrorism and hatred of America stems from this 'open sore'. Clearly this cannot be sorted out by the current cycle of violence and 'tit for tat' killings. If America could broker a settlement 'acceptable' to both sides (in the sense that each recognises it as the 'least worst' solution) then it's standing in the region may improve. They have tried in the past, but I think that the main problem has been the perception that the US favours Israel. When they failed to pressure them to follow countless UN resolutions on the one hand and invade Iraq for not compling with UN resolutions on the other ,it doesn't look good (righty or wrongly) in Arab eyes.
The post about turnstyles was a joke! (It made me laugh anyway when I read about it). Again it's not my fault that the US has the world's biggest obesity problem (I didn't go over there and force feed people).
As for baseball - I'm told that I don't understand the subtleties of the game (!!).
I was going to start a thread about the reasons for the prevalence of gun crime in certain parts of the world, but i probably won't bother now - Wouldn't want anyone to get paranoid.
Anyone want to talk about the weather?
Originally posted by ianpickeringian,
Anyone want to talk about the weather?
i think i said this on one of your very early threads that i didn't think your intent was to bash the US or the american people. i believe your intent was to question the activities and policies of certain groups of people and encourage us to think about things that are perhaps taken for granted.
you can see that some people are thinking. both ncrosby and d43mon made intriguing comments regarding reactions to getting people to question existing situations.
omnislash writes "the greatest thing you can do is speak your mind" and from chaswray we have "the greatest thing you can do is vote". to do either, it is important that people do think and not just accept status quo.
i have not gone through all your threads (no time right now), nor have i seen how you respond to your critics, but judging by this particular one i am quoting from, it is by no means your intention to offend even though some of the issues and realities behind those issues are unavoidably offensive.
in friendship,
prad
There's no argument that many major issues involve the U.S., and I more than welcome intelligent discussion, but when a one-sentence question which could easily be interpreted as a rhetorical one, it typically has the makings of a troll. I realize that this is not the case here, but in successive days questions were asked which naturally would have led to nothing more than criticising the U.S.
Believe me, few people have been as critical of the current government than I. But it gets a bit tiring, wearing down the debate. I am beginning to perceive these posts not as forays into discussion but a statement in question's clothing.
Environment - the Democrats support the Kyoto treaty, and should they win the White House, it will be honored again. The rest of the world isn't
Let us not forget that the rest of the world is so concerned about the U.S. policies they continue to actively enjoy trade and relations with the United States. Ian, your government is the biggest backer in the world - and that would be the case no matter whether the Tories or Labour were in power.
Not one nation in the world has backed any kind of argument against U.S. policy. France, which was so vocal against the U.S. involvement in the world, was one of the loudest voices in trying to get their companies invovled in rebuilding Iraq. A bit hypocritical, ya think?
Unfortunately, the problem lies not just in the White House (where U.S. citizens will have the option of voting Bush out of office in 2004) but in the international community. If the U.S. policies are wrong, Kyoto is that important and Iraq was such a disgrace, then the international community should take trade and other such actions at their disposal to send a message to the White House.
But they do not. They do not back their words or ideals. U.S. trade is so important (because we consume more than you take in) that the governments do not act.
Perhaps the argument should be - why haven't any other countries taken action in light of the Bush Administration's policy towards the Kyoto treaty?
This is not an issue about being paranoid - again, you and I probably agree on this issue, just as we do many others - but perhaps instead of putting it all on this nation your own government and the rest of the international community should be kept into focus here as well.
Just another thought-------If the general pupulas is correctly astute enough to know the the war on terror cannot be won why in the hell did our so called leaders get engaged in a war with terrorists. We have wasted enough lives for the benefit of carreer polititians who only make decisions based on whats best for them.
i didnt feel this was an anti american post. even though i am a memeber of the military i know people are entitled to their own opinions and it is not my job to agree with them. if everyone think GWB is a bad prez... then like in previous post your biggest power and one of the ones i defend is to vote. however as a personal opinion and keep in mind not one based on other posts... GWB is widely criticized for foreign policy and reactions to 911 and iraq and just about everything else but if you look at the field of future candidates... do you really think that they have something better to offer? 3/4 of the democratic candidates think that the 911 event was a government conspiracy to begin with. i have seen evidence that it is not. the bottom line is that people will always criticise the president no matter what policies or anything else he invents. america will always have critics and there is no way past that. if you dont like it then do something about it and vote. i for one will declare that i will vote for bush again simply befause of the fact that he wont get entagled with foreign critics or even american critics for that matter. he will do his job to the best of his ability and wont let the opinion of other countries influence his descisions.
mike
If you can get this online... It was available until a few days ago.
Now, it disappeared... why?
Bounding the Global War on Terrorism, by Jeffrey Record, Strategic
Studies Institute, US Army War College, December 2003.
Tip: it is not too difficult to guess why it disappear, after reading it, of course...
I have a copy of this publication in PDF format, but I haven't the means to put it online again for public access. If there is someone interested in it, just tell me.
P.S.: the PDF file weights 300-400K
Michael
Originally posted by LittleBearOn-line available at:
If you can get this online... It was available until a few days ago.
Now, it disappeared... why?
Bounding the Global War on Terrorism, by Jeffrey Record, Strategic
Studies Institute, US Army War College, December 2003.
Tip: it is not too difficult to guess why it disappear, after reading it, of course...
I have a copy of this publication in PDF ...[text shortened]... s someone interested in it, just tell me.
P.S.: the PDF file weights 300-400K
Michael
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/ssi/pubs/2003/bounding/bounding.htm
Fjord
Originally posted by pradtfThank you for your post Pradft. I would love to see more thinking, discussing, and friendly debating on these issues rather than the hardcore defensive tactic.
ian,
i think i said this on one of your very early threads that i didn't think your intent was to bash the US or the american people. i believe your intent was to question the activities and policies of certain groups of people and encourage us to think about things that are perhaps taken for granted.
you can see that some people are thinking. both ncr ...[text shortened]... the issues and realities behind those issues are unavoidably offensive.
in friendship,
prad
One of the best examples I have seen on these threads that Ian is not just out to "bash the United States" is his thread entitled George W Limerick. One of his posts included this question: "Does anyone have one about Tony Blair?"
NC🙂