Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GrimCO on April 27, 2003, 11:17:37 AM
-
Fear: After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there is no longer another nation with the military might to put the United States in check. A power vacuum was created, and theoretically the United States could become a juggernaut and go trouncing around the world, taking over other countries at will.
I have read a few comments here where all "super powers" in the past have eventually fallen. Rome, the Ottoman Empire, Khan in Asia, Ancient Egypt, Napoleonic France just to name a few...
However, if you examine these past fallen "Empires", each one involved a conquering nation trying to spread it's physical borders to gain influence. Occupying defeated nation after defeated nation eventually stretched the occupier's military beyond it's capacity to quell any uprisings or resistance.
The United States is not an occupying nation. We have no desire to "divide and conquer", nor do we wish to spread our physical borders throughout the world. Our citizens wouldn't tolerate it, as it goes against our core beliefs in freedom.
We are willing to sacrifice our own citizen's blood to defend other nations who are powerless to defend themselves. The vast majority of Americans are a good and honest people who genuinely care about the welfare of others. We will also fight to protect our own interests. We have earned that right.
Many countries with Anti-United States sentiments enjoy the freedoms they have today because of us. So go ahead and keep bashing away at the United States... Unlike the Romans, we will still be here to tolerate your short lived gratitude now turned to disdain. We won't hang you for expressing your hatred, nor will we come rolling in and occupy your country and make you wave American flags.
-
Many countries with Anti-United States sentiments enjoy the freedoms they have today because of us. So go ahead and keep bashing away at the United States...
Yes and because of that you can do WHATEVER you want TODAY... Thats the right way to see it...
-
America is the future... europe will eventually become america part II..
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Yes and because of that you can do WHATEVER you want TODAY... Thats the right way to see it...
Hmmm ... as much as you may like to think so because it serves to make your indignation "righteous" ... the US government does not believe in the ideology of "might makes right" and most likely never will. If that was our past and present mindset, then the world really would be either ours or over. Relax ... that's not what we're about. :D
-
Shaddap, im otw to the US with my strapon homemade dildo-bomb!!! Watchout!! :cool:
-
I heard the Swedes did stuff like that... And here I thought it was a just a rumor :-)
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Shaddap, im otw to the US with my strapon homemade dildo-bomb!!! Watchout!! :cool:
Damn. That'll make it harder to ID you.
-
I heard the Swedes did stuff like that... And here I thought it was a just a rumor :-)
Nah no rumor dude!! We got armys of volunteers with the deadly strapon-dildo bomb!
-
LOL Maniac
-
Originally posted by JoeSmoe
America is the future... europe will eventually become america part II..
WRONG!!!
Europe will be USSR part 2
Europe is an ideal continent and they are in competition against the USA.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Nah no rumor dude!! We got armys of volunteers with the deadly strapon-dildo bomb!
Unfortunately, all they've killed so far is a few dogs and Chirac's rectum.
-
Unfortunately, all they've killed so far is a few dogs and Chirac's rectum.
Bush is next, ive got inside info on this :D
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Bush is next, ive got inside info on this :D
NOW I know why you are so anti bush. It's just a school boy crush.
Awwwwww.
-
No i got other types of strapons for the ones i love...
-
Originally posted by Maniac
No i got other types of strapons for the ones i love...
I see the source of your anger. You have no equipment, and must resort to the use of strap ons.
I've read they have corrective surgery for that.
-
-
Originally posted by GrimCO
However, if you examine these past fallen "Empires", each one involved a conquering nation trying to spread it's physical borders to gain influence. Occupying defeated nation after defeated nation eventually stretched the occupier's military beyond it's capacity to quell any uprisings or resistance.
Greetings Grim...I would agree that for nearly the last 100 years (or at least since a decade past the Spanish-American War) the US has had many opportunities to build an empire and has resisted that temptation. However, we seem to be entering a "new American century" where the idea of being a representative for democracy is giving way to one that calls on the US to create a "benevolent hegemony".
Some of us know of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and the agenda of its neo-conservatives who now appear in the highest posts of the Bush Administration. And it is knowing their agenda that brings fear to those who recognize their ambitions as nothing less than creating an American Global Empire.
There is an excellent op/ed analysis of PNAC that was done By Jay Bookman of the Atlanta Constitution which you can read at:
http://site.[url]www.umb.edu/faculty/salzman_g/Strategy/Discussion/2002-09-29Bookman.html[/url]
However, simply note that PNAC's chairman, William Kristol, along with columnist and PNAC member Robert Kagan are on record about the role the US should play in a post Cold War world:
What should that role be? Benevolent global hegemony. Having defeated the "evil empire," the United States enjoys strategic and ideological predominance. The first objective of U.S. foreign policy should be to preserve and enhance that predominance by strengthening America's security, supporting its friends, advancing its interests, and standing up for its principles around the world.
The aspiration to benevolent hegemony might strike some as either hubristic or morally suspect. But a hegemon is nothing more or less than a leader with preponderant influence and authority over all others in its domain. http://www.ceip.org/people/kagfaff.htm
To me that bolded statement is the most dangerous. I have no problem with the US attempting to influence others using our ultrapower status, but I do not agree that our authority should be preeminent over other sovereign nations. That smacks of an empire especially when the alternative to submitting to our authority is "regime change".
The other characteristic of an empire you mentioned was a military presence in "conquered" lands to gain influence. Based on the concept of benevolent global hegemony, the PNAC goes on to say in their neo-con manifesto, Rebuilding America's Denfenses (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf), that the US should take up global "constabulatory" duties. In order to do this, they call for expansion of "permanent" US military presence in a number of global areas where the US is not currently welcome. If you read that whitepaper, the number of times "permanent" military presence arises is disturbing at the least. And realizing that the areas where the presence is "required" would also require "regime change" is even more disturbing.
I think given the agenda currently being implemented by the Bush Administration gives cause for drawing a parallel to some of those past empires you mention. Of course PNAC does not help the situation by calling the fruits of implementing their agenda "Pax Americana"...the parallel to Rome is a little too close.
-
"Strapping on a dildo in hopes to get bush."
This seem pathetically amusing to anyone else? :D
-
The problem PNAC has is threefold: the legislative, the executive and the judiciary branches.
PNAC can propose anything they like.. just like other special interest or ideological groups.
Members of PNAC can pariticpate in the government in either elective or appointive offices just like members of OTHER special interest or ideological groups have in adminstrations of the recent past.
However, it's the legislative branch that controls the purse strings and the authorization to use the miliatry. Thus, unless PNAC manages to achieve a majority in the House and Senate, their agenda is no more a matter of unstoppable destiny than any of the other special interests and ideological groups that have come and gone before.
I remember people voicing extreme concern over membership in the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. The world was going to end as we knew it.
Yet here we are, shuffling along much the same as we always have been.
I try to restrict the number of boogey men under my bed; PNAC hasn't made the cut yet.
-
Yeah, Arlo.... some folks have some strange ideas of aggression, eh?
-
Originally posted by JoeSmoe
America is the future... europe will eventually become america part II..
Oh God yes, bring Wall-Mart with ya as well will ya? And teach the natives what the "fast" part of fast food means.
(http://image1ex.villagephotos.com/extern/640697.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Swoop
Oh God yes, bring Wall-Mart with ya as well will ya? And teach the natives what the "fast" part of fast food means.
(http://image1ex.villagephotos.com/extern/640697.jpg)
we'll teach you how to build spacecraft if you teach us how to make beer...
Wal-Mart is not a bad store...I bought the compressor for my airbrush there at a great price .
-
Crow,
With all due respect, I pay about as much attention to the PNAC issue as I do to many of the other conspiracy theories.
Take the Skulls for example. Rumor has it they are the ones who actually run this country. I was wondering though... With the Republican Skulls in charge of everything and all, how did Clinton ever get elected? Their planted agents at the voting booths must have called in sick or something.
I'll put some stock in the theory of a second gunman in the grassy knoll, or even an alien spacecraft crash in Roswell. But PNAC taking over the United States government? I think I'd sooner wear a tinfoil hat to stop the aliens from taking my brainwaves...
There are a TON of special interest groups in this country... I hate all of them tossing their money around to get officials elected. I wouldn't even consider myself either Democrat or Republican. I just vote for whoever seems to be less of a moron these days.
I also have an extreme distaste for our news media here. Talk about a special interest group! Hiding under the guise of keeping the public informed. It's pathetic. Like our own little form of Al Jazeera trying to steer the public this way and that with their own selfish viewpoints and adjendas.
At any rate, the point I was trying to make is that the United States isn't some imperialistic war mongering juggernaut, hell bent on taking over the world. I think by now, it's pretty much a given that democracy is the best way to go. Even the majority of peoples who are Anti-American will agree with that.
I'm just trying to say that the vast majority of U.S. citizens wouldn't tolerate this country becoming a land grabber. That's not what we're all about.
-
I think the US may be capable of using nuclear weapons rather than let any other nation step up as #1 super power.
-
Does the meaning of 'empire' have to involve physically taking and holding land?
Is that it? Is that the only criteria?
Seems awfully outdated to me...
-
"I think the US may be capable of using nuclear weapons rather than let any other nation step up as #1 super power."
Put down the bottle or rum.
-
Originally posted by GrimCO
With all due respect, I pay about as much attention to the PNAC issue as I do to many of the other conspiracy theories.
Take the Skulls for example.
As far as I know the Skulls, Illuminati yadda yadda yadda, haven't published their membership list as PNAC has done. Take a look at the Rebuilding America's Defenses (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf) link. At the end is a list of participants. Five of the folks responsible for that document now serve in high level positions in the Bush Administration:
Paul Wolfowitz; Deputy Secretary of Defense
Eliot Cohen; Defense Policy Board
I. Lewis Libby; Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff
Dov Zakheim; Undersecretary of Defense
Stephen Cambone; Director of Office of Program, Analysis and Evaluation - Department of Defense
Now look at PNAC's Statement of Principles (http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm) and note some of the signers of this organization's founding document:
Elliott Abrams; National Security Council
Paula J. Dobriansky; Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs
Peter W. Rodman; Assistant Secretary of Defense for
International Security Affairs
Donald Rumsfeld; Secretary of Defense
Dick Cheney; Vice President of the United States
Want more...look at some of the signers of the letters sent by PNAC to sitting Presidents. They include:
Richard L. Armitage; Deputy Secretary of State
John R. Bolton; Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad; National Security Council and Special Envoy for the President
Richard Perle; Chairman of the Defense Policy Board until last month but still a board member
William Schneider; Chairman Defense Science Board - DoD
Robert B. Zoellick; U.S. Trade Representative (Ambassador)
Seth Cropsey; Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau
Mark P. Lagon; Department of State Office of Policy Planning
I dunno...maybe I am just paranoid.
-
So this super secret evil organization is made more evil by publishing its membership list...
Havent you read your evil conspiracy guide, its supposed to be SECRET!
Hell does anyone doubt these guys would we crying for the evil secretive PNAC to publish its membership if it did not do so.. "If you have nothing to hide why are you keeping your membership secret? Ha?
-
Originally posted by crowMAW
I dunno...maybe I am just paranoid.
Yea that pretty much sums it up! :)
-
Originally posted by Toad
The problem PNAC has is threefold: the legislative, the executive and the judiciary branches.
I agree with that assessment. I'm not sure that anything PNAC has done is criminal nor is what they are proposing unconstitutional, so the judicial branch does not seem to be a hindrance however. It seems that the executive branch has enough neo-con members to where that is a non-issue too. But there is hope with the Congress as it does appear that the Bush hegemony there is not as strong as once believed, which is evident by the defection of many Republicans on the tax cut issue. Hopefully, Congress will consider more carefully the evidence the President presents as excuses for the next unprovoked invasion.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
So this super secret evil organization is made more evil by publishing its membership list...
What makes you think they are a secret. Don't misconstrue your ignorance as some plan on PNAC's part to be secretive about their existance or intentions.
-
I dont think its secret, in fact they are very open - I just dont understand how this openness and transparency actually make them more evil and controlling in your eyes...
Frankly you said it best yourself - you are paranoid..
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I dont think its secret, in fact they are very open - I just dont understand how this openness and transparency actually make them more evil and controlling in your eyes...
I'm sorry, I think I may have given you the wrong impression then. I don't think that they are anymore evil or controlling because they operate in the open.
Grim was making the point that he doesn't believe in the Skulls or other conspiracy theory groups.
I was pointing out that PNAC isn't a conspiracy group...they are a political action group. Unlike conspiracy groups, they operate in the open and have published their agenda and publish their position on various issues. Unlike conspiracy groups, we know who publicly supports their position, and we know what members hold positions that can influence policy making in the government.
The fact that they do this is not evil...it is part of how government works. I only find their agenda to be unrepresentative of the ideals I respect.
-
Ahh Ok! NP then you simply disagree with their outlook on the world. I wouldnt worry too much though every adminstration has has its core of ideoligical activists and this one is no different. Like we saw with bill clinton and some of his more controversial ideas they were limited in what they accomplished because of congress and the courts - it is pretty much the same thing now with bush, look how his huge tax cut is being whittled down by both by some republicans and democrats.
America is good country and americans are basically good people, we figure things out pretty even in the end and we always have.
-
Hrmph... I see this technique being used way too often. Frame the debate as if something must be a conspiracy and then ridicule it. Skulls? Yegads...
Nobody is saying PNAC is secretive. Nobody is claiming conspiracy. Quite the contrary. They're an open organization and they spell out their agenda very clearly. It's all on their own webpage for heaven's sake. Several members carry a lot of influence with the Bush administration, and some are even within the Bush administration. There's just nothing secretive or shocking about it. There's also nothing inherently sinister about it.
So there's no need for the "deth to amreeka" sarcasm followed by dismissal because you think this is some kind of conspiracy theory. PNAC itself wouldn't deny its aims and influence in shaping foreign policy (its why they exist, afterall), so why should you?
-
Where have I or anybody else said they arent trying to influence foreign pollicy? So what, so is every other interst group or think tank in the country and of all political persuasions. Do you think that because you disagree with their outlook that they shouldnt have a voice?
The only people who ever honestly bring up the conspiracy bit are those who insist PNAC has some super special influence in what actually happends. Hell some of you lefties even implied that PNAC somehow orchestrated the 911 attack in order to push their agenda. Statements like that are ridiculous and you shouldnt be surporised if they arouse anger and ridicule.
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
People have jobs if they want one and barbeques and jacuzzis and decking and filipino maids and boats and house and apartments and vacations and vacation homes in Europe or condos in Florida, drive German or Japanese (but American made or owned) cars and wear designer clothes. Not everyone of course, certainly not me. But it really a lot more common than it was.
This was in part due to good tax breaks for foreign companies, an open economy (American style), good education system and being English speaking.
We have done well by America. We are effectively part of the American empire.
Interesting; these are things that you think make you part of the "American Empire" or "just like Americans"?
This is how you define "Americanism"?
I'll tell you how I view it. If there's anything "American" in there, it's that the people of Ireland had the freedom to make a choice without external threat of force or violence.
In short, if this is how Ireland is now, it's because the IRISH chose to be this way.
That, if anything, is what is "American" about this.
Significant in these complaints about a McDonald's on the sacred home turf is that no one.. .NO ONE... forces any country to accept a McDonald's. US Marines don't land and hold the perimeter while the drive-thru is built.
Again, it's a CHOICE, a free choice, that some most likely LOCAL investor or some entrepreneur makes with a view towards improving his or his family's life.
So, most of it rings hollow. Don't want a McDonald's? Take your business somewhere else. No customers and eventually McD will fold and move on.
It's amusing to an extent. People seem to want to copy our culture but don't want to admit that they do.
Yet, obviously, the freedom to choose isn't exclusively American. It's something that's felt in the heart of just about every man in every country who looked up into a clear starry night while holding his first born son, isn't it?
So choose what you like, like what you choose. Just don't try to blame US if you don't want a McDonald's in your town. Because that's a CHOICE that someone in your town made in all probability.
-
Originally posted by crowMAW
I was pointing out that PNAC isn't a conspiracy group...they are a political action group. Unlike conspiracy groups, they operate in the open and have published their agenda and publish their position on various issues. Unlike conspiracy groups, we know who publicly supports their position, and we know what members hold positions that can influence policy making in the government.
The fact that they do this is not evil...it is part of how government works. I only find their agenda to be unrepresentative of the ideals I respect.
Exactly. They are a some what "typical" political action group. They are not evil and this IS part of how our government works.
What appears to upset or worry you is that they appear to be achieving some of their goals AND you don't agree with their goals.
Pretty much how I felt during the 8 years of recent Democratic "hegemony" (had to laugh when I read that.. lots of words to pick from but "hegemony?").
Yin and Yang. To and fro. Ebb and flood tides.
8 years of going one way and now the pendulum is swinging back.
Relax, the NPAC isn't going to destroy the nation or the world. They'll probably swing the pendulum a bit though.
And then it will swing back.
-
"Yet here we are, shuffling along much the same as we always have been.
"
that is an extremely questionable assessment.
Miltitarly adventurists of the highest order. So brave with 1000s of nuclear warheads behind them. So righteos with their church boiling over into their goverment and any miss deeds in their own back grounds swept away. So infalable when thier pet dictators bite back.
Such gamblers only play for very high stakes, and they do not quit. The rest of the world, to a country is wondering what is next.
-
Presidential hopeful Graham slams Bush (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/04/27/graham.bush/index.html)
"I think they made a mistake," the former Florida governor told ABC's "This Week," referring to the Bush administration's rejection of his plan to give the president authority to go after Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, three organizations Graham calls the "A-list" of terrorist groups that operate largely from Syria.
"They did not want that particular ball in their court," he said.
Saying that those three organizations need to go, Graham proposed telling the Syrians they could no longer harbor terrorists and should resolve the situation immediately.
"If they don't, then [the U.S.-led coalition that toppled the Taliban] will take care of it," he said. "The 'it' is not regime change; the 'it' is those terrorist organizations."
If so, there's PNAC's in both parties, eh?
-
Your entitled to your opinion. And unlike some here apparently, I still think you're entitled to it even if you don't agree with me. ;)
Again, don't forget that what you see as "military adventurism" has been approved by the vast majority of both houses of Congress. It's not just "Bush and the dreaded PNAC".
And it isn't the nukes either. Our conventional forces alone are clearly more than enough for what Congress authorizes/authorised.
What's next?
Internationally, continued efforts to get Afghanistan and Iraq up and running as "normal" countries will self-determination.
Dealing with the NK nuclear issue in concert with China, SK and Japan...... because I seriously doubt that the UN SC will engage this issue even though the UN IAEA has placed the problem before the SC.
Nationally..... it's the economy.
But those are just my thoughts/guesses, based on no major events like 9/11 happening in the relatively near term.
-
Give up the nukes then.
lol
Any way. You saying the world goes on as normal is kind of silly.
-
PNAC is unlike any other political action comitee in that it has members at the highest levels of the Executive Branch, e.g., Vice President Richard Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
To my knowledge no political action comitee has had this many members this high in government before.
However, as was pointed out by Toad, they must get their ideas through the Legislative Branch as well. This doesn't seem to be much of a problem going through the House right now, but the Senate is a problem they haven't solved.
As to the idea that they covertly are responsible for 9-11, that is sheerly idiotic. Both sides have idiots, and the Lefties who really belive that are morons.
That said, PNAC members are certainly exploiting the post-9-11 situation in order further their agenda. Not that it is unusual for people in power to exploit world events to further their agendas.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Significant in these complaints about a McDonald's on the sacred home turf is that no one.. .NO ONE... forces any country to accept a McDonald's. US Marines don't land and hold the perimeter while the drive-thru is built.
So choose what you like, like what you choose. Just don't try to blame US if you don't want a McDonald's in your town. Because that's a CHOICE that someone in your town made in all probability.
BUT!!! If Walmart ever comes to town to start negotiations with the local government, get yer guns. Your local area economy is about to go out the window!
Walmart opens up, kiss yer women goodbye. The only place you can find em is WALMART.
Want to buy a little something for yourself? New Razor? Fishin Rod? To bad, your wife already spent all the money you made at WALMART. She got you a new welcome mat for the front door and the latest model of Chia Pet....as seen on TV.
Walmart comes to your town, kiss every mom and pop shop you can think of except fast food joints(those are next) goodbye. Grocery stores, fruit markets, butchers, tire shops, hardware stores, clothing stores. All gone. Ground to a pulp by the TRUE amerikan menace.
WALMART!!!
Arm yourselves!
hehe
-
Wal-Mart and its newly acqured european subsidiaries are very popular in europe, especially the UK and Germany...
So there, we know you love it... :p
-
Originally posted by Toad
In short, if this is how Ireland is now, it's because the IRISH chose to be this way.
Significant in these complaints about a McDonald's on the sacred home turf is that no one.. .NO ONE... forces any country to accept a McDonald's. US Marines don't land and hold the perimeter while the drive-thru is built.
Again, it's a CHOICE, a free choice, that some most likely LOCAL investor or some entrepreneur makes with a view towards improving his or his family's life.
So, most of it rings hollow. Don't want a McDonald's? Take your business somewhere else. No customers and eventually McD will fold and move on.
It's amusing to an extent. People seem to want to copy our culture but don't want to admit that they do.
Yet, obviously, the freedom to choose isn't exclusively American. It's something that's felt in the heart of just about every man in every country who looked up into a clear starry night while holding his first born son, isn't it?
So choose what you like, like what you choose. Just don't try to blame US if you don't want a McDonald's in your town. Because that's a CHOICE that someone in your town made in all probability.
TOAD that's an excellent point. I love how people complain about American influence being "forced" on them.
Good point TOAD!
-
Originally posted by Lizard3
BUT!!! If Walmart ever comes to town to start negotiations with the local government, get yer guns. Your local area economy is about to go out the window!
Walmart opens up, kiss yer women goodbye. The only place you can find em is WALMART.
Want to buy a little something for yourself? New Razor? Fishin Rod? To bad, your wife already spent all the money you made at WALMART. She got you a new welcome mat for the front door and the latest model of Chia Pet....as seen on TV.
Walmart comes to your town, kiss every mom and pop shop you can think of except fast food joints(those are next) goodbye. Grocery stores, fruit markets, butchers, tire shops, hardware stores, clothing stores. All gone. Ground to a pulp by the TRUE amerikan menace.
WALMART!!!
Arm yourselves!
hehe
Wal Mart makes women fat, wear polyester, have 8 kids, and lose 5 teeth.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Wal Mart makes women fat, wear polyester, have 8 kids, and lose 5 teeth.
More conservative claptrap. Everyone knows it's 5 kids and 8 teeth!!!
-
Originally posted by Arfann
More conservative claptrap. Everyone knows it's 5 kids and 8 teeth!!!
I AM THE CONSERVATIVE CLAPTRAP KING!
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Give up the nukes then.
lol
Any way. You saying the world goes on as normal is kind of silly.
Haven't given them up yet but we've reduced them significantly since the Cold War. Obviously, we aren't going to give them up when the genocidal dictatorships like NK are working as hard as they can to get their own.
And I have this feeling even you don't want us to give them up while the Kim Jong Il's of the world have them.
Normal world? Look back over the last 200 years and remind me of when there wasn't fighting going on somewhere in the world. Sadly, it looks like armed conflict is a "normal" state of the world.
Kinda silly to think otherwise.
-
i don't believe that swoop is against huge variety at cheap prices or getting his food rapidly. Only the french would be against that.
nash... so.. you are saying that our empire is really not an empire since it takes no land but we should all fear the U.S. as an empire builder anyway?
Here is the deal... you should only fear the U.S. if you fear yourself. oh.. wait..You can also fear it if you train terrorists or you sit on a gold toilet while you feed innocent countrymen to the shredder feet first. other than that... you should be ok.... you don't even have to eat the fast food or buy the cheap goods. or... like our little irish freind (and a lot of people here on the welfare roles) you can enjoy all the benifiets and still march around in the streets with "the U.S. is evil" signs and then drive home and have a good soak in the hot tub.
lazs
-
Ahhh, Lazs! An artist in text format! Quotable, thank you!
-
(http://home.earthlink.net/~ripsnort/Humor/pic00080.jpg)
-
Crow,
I wasn't tring to imply that PNAC is some super secret organization that only exhists in the minds of conspiracy theorists...
I was just trying to make the point that it seems highly unlikely that PNAC members could eventually organize a conspiracy to take over all branches of our government. I just can't for the life of me see a bunch of democrats hopping on the PNAC bandwagon and taking over.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Wal-Mart and its newly acqured european subsidiaries are very popular in europe, especially the UK and Germany...
So there, we know you love it... :p
LOL
You should see wall mart in Los Angeles, California. Its gonna give you an impression as if you were in a "swap meet" or the black market. Wall Mart in Los Angeles is messy and you will see lots of clothes on the floor and toy boxes opened.
-
Originally posted by Toad
What appears to upset or worry you is that they appear to be achieving some of their goals AND you don't agree with their goals.
Right...do you believe we should use military force to regime change simply to set up new governments friendly to the US?
Pretty much how I felt during the 8 years of recent Democratic "hegemony" (had to laugh when I read that.. lots of words to pick from but "hegemony?").[/B]
Eh...it was a Bill Kristol word...but it fits. Although I'm not sure I would categorize the Republican Congress as a group willing to capitulate to Clinton's will. It seems we had some Federal government closings over budget fights during those years.
-
cpxxx,
Thanks for making an intelligent reply to the post. It was refreshing to say the least! Although I don't agree with some of your statements, I sure do respect your opinion.
As for the United States being a financial empire, I can agree with some of that. We definitely HAVE spread our influence throughout the world economically. However, most countries have benefited from this, and it was their own choosing to allow American companies to set up camp there.
The same argument could be made here in America. Japan owns A LOT of the major corporations here in the United States, and we have benefited from it financially because American employees work for these corporations. I'd venture to say Japan owns quite a few companies in Ireland as well. I still don't feel that we're a colony of Japan, however.
As for the rather ignorant fellow who made the statement "give up your nukes", I can't really believe he meant that. If he did, he's about as short sighted as they come. Would you really want America to completely give up it's entire nuclear arsenal? I'd like to know...
-
Crow: Right...do you believe we should use military force to regime change simply to set up new governments friendly to the US?
No, I don't. Apparently you don't either. However, I also don't believe that Iraq would have been invaded by the US IF Hussein had complied with the terms of the '91 ceasefire and the following 12 years of ~17 UN/SC resolutions to get them to comply.
However, there's a Democratic Presidential "hopeful"that appears to think so. Is Graham a PNAC? Have the PNAC's penetrated the Democratic leadership?
Presidential hopeful Graham slams Bush (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/04/27/graham.bush/index.html)
"I think they made a mistake," the former Florida governor told ABC's "This Week," referring to the Bush administration's rejection of his plan to give the president authority to go after Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, three organizations Graham calls the "A-list" of terrorist groups that operate largely from Syria.
"They did not want that particular ball in their court," he said.
Saying that those three organizations need to go, Graham proposed telling the Syrians they could no longer harbor terrorists and should resolve the situation immediately.
"If they don't, then [the U.S.-led coalition that toppled the Taliban] will take care of it," he said. "The 'it' is not regime change; the 'it' is those terrorist organizations."
Looks like Graham adocates invading Syria to eliminate the terrorist organizations based there. I'm wagering that would take longer than the Iraq operation. What do you think?
Crow: Although I'm not sure I would categorize the Republican Congress as a group willing to capitulate to Clinton's will. It seems we had some Federal government closings over budget fights during those years.
Are you characterising the present Congress as willing to capitulate to Bush's will? If so, tell me why Bush's tax cut has been reduced by 30% and it's looking like it will be reduced even further.
I'm sorry, I just don't see this monolithic PNAC block rolling over all opposition in our government. I think the framer's set up a remarkably good system although I'm sure they never envisioned special interest groups to the extent we suffer them today. Nonetheless, PNAC doesn't rule the country. They're not even close. And they too will fade. Imagine, for instance if the Dems finally find a reasonable candidate and they win in 2004. How will the PNAC ogre react? Open revolution in the streets? I doubt it. They'll fade into the background again.
I just seem to be unable to lose any sleep over PNAC. I've got other real problems that keep me awake.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Presidential hopeful Graham slams Bush (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/04/27/graham.bush/index.html)
If so, there's PNAC's in both parties, eh?
He's been singing that song for some time. But he also voted against the Iraq Resolution because it was limited only to Saddam who was nowhere near the immediate threat as these terrorist groups in Bob's opinion: ''I will defy anybody to say that Iraq meets those standards. We're not talking about a threat 90 days from now. We're not talking about a threat that may come a year from now if nuclear material is made available. I'm talking about a threat that could happen this afternoon.'' That's pretty un-PNAC. ;)
-
The point, however, is that Graham is essentially advocating an invasion of Syria if they do not do what we tell them to do about the terrorist groups.
Sounds pretty "PNAC" to me. Does it to you?
So, it's not just PNAC is it? Lots of people think alike while a whole 'nother lot of people think differently.
Sounds like the US to me. And I'm not losing sleep over it.
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
LOL
You should see wall mart in Los Angeles, California. Its gonna give you an impression as if you were in a "swap meet" or the black market. Wall Mart in Los Angeles is messy and you will see lots of clothes on the floor and toy boxes opened.
Oh yes, I agree 100%! Wal-Mart is a frightful place like thrirld world bazzar but they have tons of stuff and all very cheap, again like a third world bazzar. No wonder they love it in europe...
But it is a fantastic business and very profitable and of cource the biggest retailer in the world and very very poular in europe, just like McDonalds...
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Oh yes, I agree 100%! Wal-Mart is a frightful place like thrirld world bazzar but they have tons of stuff and all very cheap, again like a third world bazzar. No wonder they love it in europe...
But it is a fantastic business and very profitable and of cource the biggest retailer in the world and very very poular in europe, just like McDonalds...
Yes, unlike many south american countries, where you buy your food and ice after it's been laying on the street.
-
Crow: Right...do you believe we should use military force to regime change simply to set up new governments friendly to the US?
Originally posted by Toad
No, I don't. Apparently you don't either.
OK, so we agree that the PNAC agenda where military force is used to implement regime change in order to create the Kristol vision of a "benevolent global hegemony" is unacceptable. Can we also agree that many PNAC members, who do believe in the Kristol vision, now hold positions of extreme influence in the Bush Administration (see a list in my previous post)? Would you also agree that it is likely that these beliefs maybe effecting current US foreign policy, especially based on recent US actions that mirror the recommendations made by PNAC in their letters and other past publications?
However, I also don't believe that Iraq would have been invaded by the US IF Hussein had complied with the terms of the '91 ceasefire and the following 12 years of ~17 UN/SC resolutions to get them to comply[/B]
If that were the only necessary justification, then why did the Administration bother producing other excuses? Is it because the other excuses were the only ones that would appear reasonable for the US to act without UN sanction and to ignore UN1441?
Are you characterizing the present Congress as willing to capitulate to Bush's will? If so, tell me why Bush's tax cut has been reduced by 30% and it's looking like it will be reduced even further. [/B]
I mentioned that in my other post...however, my own personal feelings (and they are nothing more than that) are that Congress did capitulate on the Iraq Resolution and swallowed the Administration's pablum. Having worked for some of the folks in Congress, I know many are intelligent enough to realize that the "evidence" presented by the Administration to justify the war was pretty weak...but they supported the President anyway.
I'm sorry, I just don't see this monolithic PNAC block rolling over all opposition in our government.[/B]
I agree...their members and other like-minded neo-cons don't run everything. But I do think they hold positions of extreme influence on foreign relations and defense issues in this administration. And it does appear that this president is willing to let his decisions be influenced by these advisors. Bush Sr had several of the same folks in his administration who provided him with similar advice in '92, however he also had enough foreign relations experience to recognize and reject that bad advice.
-
Where we apparently don't agree is that PNAC has the power to make things happen. Their beliefs in the use of military force are just that; their beliefs. They can't "send in the troops". They can suggest it, their members in appointive office can reccomend it.. but CONGRESS has to approve it. Checks and balances. Gotta love the founders.
So, I'm not getting worked up about it. But feel free to do so yourself.
"Produce other excuses"? I think any administration tries to gather as much support as they can in any way they can. They'll "produce' as much support as they can, in any way they can.
There was absolutely NO justification for Clinton to go into Bosnia. There was no UN SC resolution and the act itself was a CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE NATO CHARTER. Yet they managed to "produce other excuses" to justify their actions.
Fer pete's sake... you're acting like special interests are something new. I'll wager there were "special interests" bugging George Washington and the first Congress too.
Congress capitulated? Maybe they just agreed? Look at the vote.. it's not even close. It had plenty of support on both sides of the aisle. Hard to paint that as as PNAC conspiracy or PNAC overwhelming power.
The "neo-cons" don't have any more influence in the Bush administration than the "neo-libs" did in the 8 years of the Clinton admin. They had postions of "extreme influence" too. Every President is influenced to some degree by the opinions of his advisors.. that's why they call them "advisors".
As I said, will you still be concerned if Bush doesn't win reelection and a whole new cast of characters takes over those PNAC positions of influence?
It's just American politics. Yin and Yang... and it's a good system. Yeah, the pendulum is moving in the conservative direction. And not only is that to be expected after 8 years of moving in the liberal direction, it's probably a good thing.
And it'll be a good thing when it swings back the other way too. And it will. That's what keeps us heading towards the center over the long term. ;)
-
I look forward to seeing them march against the Russian war in Chechnya or North Korean death camps or Mugabe in Zimababwe.
I suspect I have a long wait.
Those saying 'US is evil' are clearly lunatics.
Those saying 'I disagree with US foreign policy and my country's part in it' are probably entirely sane.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Where we apparently don't agree is that PNAC has the power to make things happen. Their beliefs in the use of military force are just that; their beliefs. They can't "send in the troops". They can suggest it, their members in appointive office can reccomend it.. but CONGRESS has to approve it. Checks and balances. Gotta love the founders.
Question for you then Toad...what role can the executive branch play in influencing the legislative? None? Some? At the Federal level, does the president as head of the party have any sway over members of his party in the Congress? If the president vociferously supports an issue, what effect do you think that may have on legislative members of his party?
There was absolutely NO justification for Clinton to go into Bosnia. There was no UN SC resolution and the act itself was a CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE NATO CHARTER. Yet they managed to "produce other excuses" to justify their actions.[/B]
I agree, and I did not support that action either.
As I said, will you still be concerned if Bush doesn't win reelection and a whole new cast of characters takes over those PNAC positions of influence?[/B]
I think it would depend on the issue...if this future administration is stacked with those in favor of socialized healthcare, I would probably be suspicious of their agenda especially if the new appointees had been members of a PAC that advocated making all healthcare providers Federal employees and nationalizing all healthcare facilities. I'd become even more suspicious if the president successfully lobbies Congress to initiate portions of that PAC's agenda...it would certainly cause me concern that they may succeed in implementing their full agenda.
And it'll be a good thing when it swings back the other way too. And it will. That's what keeps us heading towards the center over the long term. ;) [/B]
True...I am concerned however about the damage to the goodwill we earned immediately following 9/11 and the cost of the lost trust in the long term. How easily that goodwill was damaged and how difficult it will be to repair by some future administration. (It is kind of like the deficit...eventually you have to pay one way or another.)
I'm sure there have been other PACs who have had a great deal of influence in the past (certainly Zbigniew's Trilateral from the 70's comes to mind). However, I'm not so sure that the risks of implementing their agendas had the extreme consequences that the PNAC/neo-con military agenda has on our long term ability to work with other nations to resolve international issues. Perhaps you have some examples that would compare?
-
"nash... so.. you are saying that our empire is really not an empire since it takes no land but we should all fear the U.S. as an empire builder anyway?"
Uhh... No.
-
Crow, it's the old saying. The President proposes and the Congress disposes.
Nothing gets done without money. The Prez can propose anything he likes but it's Congress that provides the wherewithal to get it done.
Again, look at the tax cut. It's way down from Bush's original proposal and it's going to go down again from where they're at now.
So I would say the Prez has some influence. He can sway some party members in Congress and some he can't. (Voinovich of Ohio in this case)
It's just not as lock step as you'd like to make it, IMO. Basically, even the Prez can't get Congress to agree on anything which is why it's pretty rare anything gets done... which, is probably a good thing. ;)
But no Congress is the President's lapdog. They understand and defend their role in the checks and balances scheme of government.
So, if the next administration sets those goals and you become "suspicious"... what possible difference does it make? You'll just work against it like you're working against what you perceive to be bad PNAC ideas. You write your Reps, you write the Prez, you speak out to your neighbors to do the same.
And, in the end, no matter what the new Prez and his suspicious cronies propose, it will be CONGRESS, all 585 or whatever of them, that makes the decisions. Those "suspicious" guys will have to convince a majority of our Reps while "we the people" have the opportunity AND responsibility to make our desires known.
Goodwill lost? I'm not sure there was much to lose. Somebody has to do the right things, even if they're hard. Now I'm not saying Iraq was "right". I would have preferred a specific UN SC resolution. But if the WMD are found, I think overall it was the "right" thing to do.
And I think if you step back and look at the whole disarmament thing from '91 to '03, it's pretty clear there are/were d mn few countries that actually want to do the "right thing".
So, if it means keeping the good will of say the French..... well, again, we haven't lost much, IMO. Because there was never anything of substance to lose there. IMO.
Bottom line is that all of fears of PNAC proposals is based on the assumption that they will get those things done.
My view is that any rational review of how Congress works makesit highly unlikely that much will get done at all.
How long have they been talking about reforming the Income tax laws? Revising Medicare?
They talk a lot. They do little. I doubt PNAC would be able to change that if they had 10X as many moles in appointive office.
Sorry, I'm just not going to lose sleep over PNAC.
-
Since America is the last super-power, does that mean we win and get all the toys?
-
"Many countries with Anti-United States sentiments enjoy the freedoms they have today because of us. So go ahead and keep bashing away at the United States... Unlike the Romans, we will still be here to tolerate your short lived gratitude now turned to disdain. We won't hang you for expressing your hatred, nor will we come rolling in and occupy your country and make you wave American flags.
"
the 100s of thousands of people in central america that have been killed by US trained death squads and the millions of people in indo china killed by the US and its surrogates for wanting a goverment that represented their wishes instead of one that represented US intrests thank you for your sacrifices in their honor.
I was scared for a while there. I thought this was saying there were no more super bowls. Just more brainwashed US citizens though.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Haven't given them up yet but we've reduced them significantly since the Cold War. Obviously, we aren't going to give them up when the genocidal dictatorships like NK are working as hard as they can to get their own.
And I have this feeling even you don't want us to give them up while the Kim Jong Il's of the world have them.
Normal world? Look back over the last 200 years and remind me of when there wasn't fighting going on somewhere in the world. Sadly, it looks like armed conflict is a "normal" state of the world.
Kinda silly to think otherwise.
The people that waged those wars over the last 200 years have been looked on since as aggressors and mass murderers. Kind of silly to not think of the current US regime as any different.
Who do you want to associate yourself with then Toad. Nepoleons France? Bismarks Germany? Hitlers Germany? Tojos Japan?.
You are correct though. Nothing has changed. Just for some reason Americans that support the current regime in Washington think that the definition of Aggressor has changed to make them feel better about themselves.
This last invasion ended up better then it could have. But it could have ended like Vietnam. With 3-4million dead locals and the US in 30 years of denial about the crimes they commited their.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
""
the 100s of thousands of people in central america that have been killed by US trained death squads and the millions of people in indo china killed by the US and its surrogates for wanting a goverment that represented their wishes instead of one that represented US intrests thank you for your sacrifices in their honor.
I was scared for a while there. I thought this was saying there were no more super bowls. Just more brainwashed US citizens though.
Yep, America is evil. We should turn ourselves in to the world court at once. Then when America and all of it's evil is gone, a nice country can take our place in the world.
Maybe the world will get lucky and a country like China can take our place. Then there will be true peace and harmony.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
i don't believe that swoop is against huge variety at cheap prices
Greater variety, but less choice.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Greater variety, but less choice.
wow!
Greater variety means less choice? hmmmmm
I have a new quote!
-
Its funny how peoples hatrered for the USA comes out if you give them a chance... Especially those useless envious canadians.. :p
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Greater variety, but less choice.
Yeah, us Americans have a greater variety but less choice alright. Does this make sense to anyone here?
Canada has all the choices. I have to travel from Arizona to Canada just to get a good price on a TV set....... right
I can't even find half the things I want to buy in America....we have hardly any choices here you know. Plus gas is SO expensive here, I can't drive to shop anyway. And when I skrimp and save fpr enough to drive, I can't find any stores that stock anything I would want to buy.
It's horrible here. Make it stop!
-
Originally posted by Pongo
the millions of people in indo china killed by the US and its surrogates for wanting a goverment that represented their wishes instead of one that represented US intrests thank you for your sacrifices in their honor.
The champeen genocidal killer in IndoChina was Pol Pot. He was put into power by the North Vietnamese.
From Time.com The enormity of what Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge party did in the latter half of the 1970s defies hyperbole. The only word for it: genocide. The death toll: certainly more than a million, perhaps twice that amount. Among the first evidence of the horror, this "killing field" was uncovered in 1980.
(http://image.pathfinder.com/time/daily/polpot/images/pixbone1.jpg)
There's absolutely no way that your quoted statement above is anything but pure exaggeration. Further, if you're talking about the VietNam conflict, are you trying to say the South wanted to join the North and the US was forcibly preventing that?
-
Toad, you and I both know America is the true evil of this earth...it's so obvious!
-
Originally posted by Pongo
The people that waged those wars over the last 200 years have been looked on since as aggressors and mass murderers. Kind of silly to not think of the current US regime as any different.
Kind of outrageous and far beyond silly to try to make the case that the US is anything like them.
Who do you want to associate yourself with then Toad. Nepoleons France? Bismarks Germany? Hitlers Germany? Tojos Japan?.
Please do tell me which of those countries bent on conquest we resemble in the least.
Powell said it very well recently. I'll say it again in case you missed it in the sig block.
Powell:
I mean, it was not soft power that freed Europe. It was hard power. And what followed immediately after hard power? Did the United States ask for dominion over a single nation in Europe? No. Soft power came in the Marshall Plan. Soft power came with American GIs who put their weapons down once the war was over and helped all those nations rebuild. We did the same thing in Japan.
So our record of living our values and letting our values be an inspiration to others I think is clear. And I don't think I have anything to be ashamed of or apologize for with respect to what America has done for the world.
We have gone forth from our shores repeatedly over the last hundred years and we’ve done this as recently as the last year in Afghanistan and put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives, and we have asked for nothing except enough ground to bury them in, and otherwise we have returned home to seek our own, you know, to seek our own lives in peace, to live our own lives in peace. "
You can sling that old VietNam "crime" BS around all you like. But it's still just BS. We didn't go there to conquer anyone as you suggest with your Napoleon/Hitler/Tojo association; we went there to give them a chance to live without the boot of Communism forcibly planted on their necks.
-
The US is the world's worst evil..we all know that!
-
Originally posted by NUKE
The US is the world's worst evil..we all know that!
no no no.... the US is the world's BEST evil.
-
Pongo,
Yeah right, the U.S. is just like Tojo's Japan, Hitler's Germany, yada yada yada... Americans are a bunch of mass murdering genocidal maniacs who kill for the enjoyment of it and relish on the misery of others.
Your one sided diatribe holds about as much water as a sieve.
If nothing else, it was amusing... On second thought, it wasn't even amusing.
-
I forgot to tell you to dig some more :-)
-
NUKE, I'm sorry for being so cryptic in my post.
When I said there is greater variety, but less choice, I'm referring to Walmart.
Sure you are can buy alot of different things at Walmart, but when they drive the smaller local stores out of business, you have less choice of who to buy from.
This has little do with Canada or the US and everything to do with globalisation.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
NUKE, I'm sorry for being so cryptic in my post.
When I said there is greater variety, but less choice, I'm referring to Walmart.
Sure you are can buy alot of different things at Walmart, but when they drive the smaller local stores out of business, you have less choice of who to buy from.
This has little do with Canada or the US and everything to do with globalisation.
We have a walmart, and numerous other stores to buy from.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
We have a walmart, and numerous other stores to buy from.
But less then before Walmart right? Alot less. So still less choice of who you buy from.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
But less then before Walmart right? Alot less. So still less choice of who you buy from.
I very rarely use walmart. None of the stores I use have shut down. In fact, a new store I like just opened.
I'm sure Walmart has an effect on business. All businesses effect each other.
-
I hate to see the Mom and Pop shops fold. It's the end of an era.
But when shoppers make the choice to "choose Walmart" what are they saying? They're saying they prefer Walmart, aren't they? They seem to be happy with their choice of who to buy from.
-
Lots of people work at walmart..
They seem to have better benifits and security then you often get at small stores. Doenst seem that bad a trade to me. I buy specilized things at small stores and generic things at big generic stores.
Adam Smith loves this stuff.
-
Originally posted by Toad
I hate to see the Mom and Pop shops fold. It's the end of an era.
But when shoppers make the choice to "choose Walmart" what are they saying? They're saying they prefer Walmart, aren't they? They seem to be happy with their choice of who to buy from.
I dont think they prefer wallyworld, they're just lazy. The one stop shop and all that. I know I've done it.
-
Originally posted by GrimCO
As for the rather ignorant fellow who made the statement "give up your nukes", I can't really believe he meant that. If he did, he's about as short sighted as they come. Would you really want America to completely give up it's entire nuclear arsenal? I'd like to know...
Actually, we tried once. the Baruch-Lilienthal plan was veto'd by Stalin in the good ol' UN.
-
Lizard, I think "lazy" IS a preference. ;)
-
And here I thought everyone shopped at Walmart because they wear cool looking blue aprons... Silly me...