How is it wrong/immoral/scary/unexpected that a superpower would wish to protect it's pre-eminence, given the alternatives provided by other recent superpowers and rising superpowers? It is a natural state of order that the strong wish to remain strong. </strong><hr></blockquote>
A civilized society should overcome the 'natural state of order' and allow peoples in other countries to be self-determined.
[quote]"I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs. <hr></blockquote>
The US has only been the sole superpower for a little over a decade.
The US only became a superpower ~70 years ago.
As for the Cold War, take a history class for once, then take some poli-sci and call me in the morning.
A Government Depository is not a government library. What is a government library anyway? Do you mean a state historical library? I think it's pretty clear that you have never researched any government documents since you apparently don't know your ass from a chicken. But here is a lesson: Certain libraries, typically very large university ones like the one I work at, agree to store gov pubs. It is one of the few specifically archival departments. The GPO sends just about everything they print out, and we also have access to all sorts of electronic records in CD-ROM and online (which you do, too, but they are only recently becoming easy to find and it's only a percentage of what is put out). We also have a large collection of UN documents. This is just one part of the library. This wouldn't news to you had you ever done research on what you claim to know.
Oh, and last year I got a promotion and two raises while being the head of the staff organization that covers 6 libraries at a Big Ten university (in addition to my normal job), so I can do my job just fine, thank you. How your work going?
The reason I go on this forum is because it is the only place I can find people that support this war and are blind to the propaganda. The only way I will understand the views of the hawkish American public is to find them here.
For example, my boss' husband was interviewed on NPR the other day, and he was involved in a debate with a hawk congressman. The show was delayed because the producer had such a hard time finding anyone (of influence) that would come on supporting the war. He noted that while many people support it when asked, not many are willing to voluntarily support it in a debate.
Oh yeah, and another thing Tulkas, before you start giving us all lectures on the age and beauty of the US democratic system (something that makes us Yurrupeans look at each other and giggle), may I remind you that it was 1967 (that is, 'nineteen sixty-seven') before many black people were, by law, able to vote in some Southern states.
Think I'm lying?
"The harsh fact is that in many places in this country men and women are kept from voting simply because they are Negroes ... "
President Lyndon B. Johnson, introducing the Voting Rights Act to Congress, March 15, 1965
<strong>Oh yeah, and another thing Tulkas, before you start giving us all lectures on the age and beauty of the US democratic system (something that makes us Yurrupeans look at each other and giggle), may I remind you that it was 1967 (that is, 'nineteen sixty-seven') before many black people were, by law, able to vote in some Southern states.
Think I'm lying?
"The harsh fact is that in many places in this country men and women are kept from voting simply because they are Negroes ... "
President Lyndon B. Johnson, introducing the Voting Rights Act to Congress, March 15, 1965
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Harald ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. It relates here how? Oh, more US bashing, I get it.
The US has only been the sole superpower for a little over a decade.
The US only became a superpower ~70 years ago.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right, and prior to that the structure and balance of world power was very different. My question still stands, but let's limit it to more recent history that the founding of the US. Do you think that if the US was not a superpower during the last 70, you would be living with the political structure you have now?
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
As for the Cold War, take a history class for once, then take some poli-sci and call me in the morning.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Took a couple poli sci courses and bird courses when I started my comp sci degree. Found them interesting. So what?
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
A Government Depository is not a government library. What is a government library anyway? Do you mean a state historical library? I think it's pretty clear that you have never researched any government documents since you apparently don't know your ass from a chicken. But here is a lesson: Certain libraries, typically very large university ones like the one I work at, agree to store gov pubs. It is one of the few specifically archival departments. The GPO sends just about everything they print out, and we also have access to all sorts of electronic records in CD-ROM and online (which you do, too, but they are only recently becoming easy to find and it's only a percentage of what is put out). We also have a large collection of UN documents. This is just one part of the library. This wouldn't news to you had you ever done research on what you claim to know.
Oh, and last year I got a promotion and two raises while being the head of the staff organization that covers 6 libraries at a Big Ten university (in addition to my normal job), so I can do my job just fine, thank you. How your work going?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My work is going fine thanks for asking. My work is irrelevant to this discussion. But, you obviously feel that yours grants you knowledge beyond mere mortals. Did I ever say/imply that you did not have greater acess to information? I am sure you have better access to information that almost anyone else here, does that make all other opinions irrelevant? Again, I defer to your infinite librarian wisdom and knowdledge. Why do you constantly feel the need to repeat your position here?
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
The reason I go on this forum is because it is the only place I can find people that support this war and are blind to the propaganda. The only way I will understand the views of the hawkish American public is to find them here.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Truly, with your admitted vast resources at your finger tips, this forum is the only place you are able to find people who support the war? If you are being honest, then perhaps your resources aren't as limitless as you seem to think. Dude, I am in Canada, and I can go down to a local coffee shop and find people on both sides of the debate, and have. You really ought to try getting outside, (where life actually happens) and get your nose out the books and away from the computer, if you want to try and find people willing to discuss this issue, other than here on AI.
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
For example, my boss' husband was interviewed on NPR the other day, and he was involved in a debate with a hawk congressman. The show was delayed because the producer had such a hard time finding anyone (of influence) that would come on supporting the war. He noted that while many people support it when asked, not many are willing to voluntarily support it in a debate.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And yet when you find people here, willing to engage in civilized debate, you automatically take on your holier-than-thou, I-know-better-than-you-and-you-are-a-moron attitude. It doesn't seem you are looking for people to "voluntarily support it in a debate", as you find here, instead you seem to wish to proclaim your seemingly infinite wisdom, gleaned during much free time at your job.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. It relates here how? Oh, more US bashing, I get it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tulkas, if we were in an alternate universe and you were actually willing to read and educate yourself, I would suggest the book How Democratic is the American Constitution by Robert A. Dahl. Any library should have it (Opps. I forgot you don't use those). It's also required reading in many low-level poli-sci courses. It demonstrates pretty clearly that newer democracies, specifically some European ones, have much higher developed and representative forms of government than the US, and the conclusion is that the biggest thing limiting advancement and reform in America is the view that current policies are 'sacred.'
This is also why it is so crazy that so many in the US think our form of government is so just. You can easily pick out which people have never studies non-US democratic systems, or democratic theory at all, by looking at those that support US political imposition on soveriegn states. It's also funny that these same people tend to be the ones that think we have nothing to learn from foreign governments. Why should we? The reason we are so successful is BECAUSE our government is so just, benevolent and rational, they say. How about not.
Considering the context, this is pretty funny.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don?t think many people would agree with you. But if you?re able to laugh at peoples death, then all the credit to you. I live with death on an almost daily basis. I still don?t see what's funny about it, as jaded as I am about the whole thing.
Truly, with your admitted vast resources at your finger tips, this forum is the only place you are able to find people who support the war? <hr></blockquote>
yes. Pretty wild, ain't it? And you know what, I have met very few people that do know folks that support the war. And it goes across party lines.
[quote]You really ought to try getting outside, (where life actually happens) and get your nose out the books and away from the computer, if you want to try and find people willing to discuss this issue...<hr></blockquote>
I'm sure I do more in a day than you do in a month.
Comments
<strong>
How is it wrong/immoral/scary/unexpected that a superpower would wish to protect it's pre-eminence, given the alternatives provided by other recent superpowers and rising superpowers? It is a natural state of order that the strong wish to remain strong. </strong><hr></blockquote>
A civilized society should overcome the 'natural state of order' and allow peoples in other countries to be self-determined.
I'd say because of efforts like this one above, our National Security is in good hands.
fellowship and scott?
<strong>
fellowship and scott?</strong><hr></blockquote>"and I said nothing/
because I was not a lawyer . . . "
The sad thing here is that if he were not a lawyer we would have never heard about it.
A couple of things:
The US has only been the sole superpower for a little over a decade.
The US only became a superpower ~70 years ago.
As for the Cold War, take a history class for once, then take some poli-sci and call me in the morning.
A Government Depository is not a government library. What is a government library anyway? Do you mean a state historical library? I think it's pretty clear that you have never researched any government documents since you apparently don't know your ass from a chicken. But here is a lesson: Certain libraries, typically very large university ones like the one I work at, agree to store gov pubs. It is one of the few specifically archival departments. The GPO sends just about everything they print out, and we also have access to all sorts of electronic records in CD-ROM and online (which you do, too, but they are only recently becoming easy to find and it's only a percentage of what is put out). We also have a large collection of UN documents. This is just one part of the library. This wouldn't news to you had you ever done research on what you claim to know.
Oh, and last year I got a promotion and two raises while being the head of the staff organization that covers 6 libraries at a Big Ten university (in addition to my normal job), so I can do my job just fine, thank you. How your work going?
The reason I go on this forum is because it is the only place I can find people that support this war and are blind to the propaganda. The only way I will understand the views of the hawkish American public is to find them here.
For example, my boss' husband was interviewed on NPR the other day, and he was involved in a debate with a hawk congressman. The show was delayed because the producer had such a hard time finding anyone (of influence) that would come on supporting the war. He noted that while many people support it when asked, not many are willing to voluntarily support it in a debate.
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
Think I'm lying?
"The harsh fact is that in many places in this country men and women are kept from voting simply because they are Negroes ... "
President Lyndon B. Johnson, introducing the Voting Rights Act to Congress, March 15, 1965
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Harald ]</p>
because I was not a lawyer . . . "
<hr></blockquote>
did you think i was insinuating that the security guards were them?
no..no....i was just wondering what they thought as it kind of pertained to the ari fleischer thread.
i'm sorry if that was my impression. i would remove it, but hey, it's out there.......(and quoted)
and all i can say is that's not how i meant it. again i'm sorry.
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: superkarate monkeydeathcar ]</p>
<strong>Isn?t a shopping mall private property? They can pretty much clear off whom they wish, no?</strong><hr></blockquote>
<ducks as 'The Point' goes whistling over Mika's head. Again.>
<strong>Oh yeah, and another thing Tulkas, before you start giving us all lectures on the age and beauty of the US democratic system (something that makes us Yurrupeans look at each other and giggle), may I remind you that it was 1967 (that is, 'nineteen sixty-seven') before many black people were, by law, able to vote in some Southern states.
Think I'm lying?
"The harsh fact is that in many places in this country men and women are kept from voting simply because they are Negroes ... "
President Lyndon B. Johnson, introducing the Voting Rights Act to Congress, March 15, 1965
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Harald ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. It relates here how? Oh, more US bashing, I get it.
"Oh yeah, and another thing Tulkas, before you start giving us all lectures on the age and beauty of the US democratic system."
Which you did, you see.
READING COMPREHENSION MAN. Try it.
<strong>
<ducks as 'The Point' goes whistling over Mika's head. Again.></strong><hr></blockquote>
What is the point? Your "right" to disturb the peace on private property?
<strong>...disturb the peace...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Considering the context, this is pretty funny.
<strong> Tulkas, tulkas, tulkas.
A couple of things:
The US has only been the sole superpower for a little over a decade.
The US only became a superpower ~70 years ago.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right, and prior to that the structure and balance of world power was very different. My question still stands, but let's limit it to more recent history that the founding of the US. Do you think that if the US was not a superpower during the last 70, you would be living with the political structure you have now?
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
As for the Cold War, take a history class for once, then take some poli-sci and call me in the morning.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Took a couple poli sci courses and bird courses when I started my comp sci degree. Found them interesting. So what?
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
A Government Depository is not a government library. What is a government library anyway? Do you mean a state historical library? I think it's pretty clear that you have never researched any government documents since you apparently don't know your ass from a chicken. But here is a lesson: Certain libraries, typically very large university ones like the one I work at, agree to store gov pubs. It is one of the few specifically archival departments. The GPO sends just about everything they print out, and we also have access to all sorts of electronic records in CD-ROM and online (which you do, too, but they are only recently becoming easy to find and it's only a percentage of what is put out). We also have a large collection of UN documents. This is just one part of the library. This wouldn't news to you had you ever done research on what you claim to know.
Oh, and last year I got a promotion and two raises while being the head of the staff organization that covers 6 libraries at a Big Ten university (in addition to my normal job), so I can do my job just fine, thank you. How your work going?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My work is going fine thanks for asking. My work is irrelevant to this discussion. But, you obviously feel that yours grants you knowledge beyond mere mortals. Did I ever say/imply that you did not have greater acess to information? I am sure you have better access to information that almost anyone else here, does that make all other opinions irrelevant? Again, I defer to your infinite librarian wisdom and knowdledge. Why do you constantly feel the need to repeat your position here?
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
The reason I go on this forum is because it is the only place I can find people that support this war and are blind to the propaganda. The only way I will understand the views of the hawkish American public is to find them here.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Truly, with your admitted vast resources at your finger tips, this forum is the only place you are able to find people who support the war? If you are being honest, then perhaps your resources aren't as limitless as you seem to think. Dude, I am in Canada, and I can go down to a local coffee shop and find people on both sides of the debate, and have. You really ought to try getting outside, (where life actually happens) and get your nose out the books and away from the computer, if you want to try and find people willing to discuss this issue, other than here on AI.
[quote]Originally posted by giant:
<strong>
For example, my boss' husband was interviewed on NPR the other day, and he was involved in a debate with a hawk congressman. The show was delayed because the producer had such a hard time finding anyone (of influence) that would come on supporting the war. He noted that while many people support it when asked, not many are willing to voluntarily support it in a debate.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And yet when you find people here, willing to engage in civilized debate, you automatically take on your holier-than-thou, I-know-better-than-you-and-you-are-a-moron attitude. It doesn't seem you are looking for people to "voluntarily support it in a debate", as you find here, instead you seem to wish to proclaim your seemingly infinite wisdom, gleaned during much free time at your job.
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Tulkas ]</p>
<strong>
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. It relates here how? Oh, more US bashing, I get it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tulkas, if we were in an alternate universe and you were actually willing to read and educate yourself, I would suggest the book How Democratic is the American Constitution by Robert A. Dahl. Any library should have it (Opps. I forgot you don't use those). It's also required reading in many low-level poli-sci courses. It demonstrates pretty clearly that newer democracies, specifically some European ones, have much higher developed and representative forms of government than the US, and the conclusion is that the biggest thing limiting advancement and reform in America is the view that current policies are 'sacred.'
This is also why it is so crazy that so many in the US think our form of government is so just. You can easily pick out which people have never studies non-US democratic systems, or democratic theory at all, by looking at those that support US political imposition on soveriegn states. It's also funny that these same people tend to be the ones that think we have nothing to learn from foreign governments. Why should we? The reason we are so successful is BECAUSE our government is so just, benevolent and rational, they say. How about not.
<strong>I've told you before Tulkas, the clue's in the question.
"Oh yeah, and another thing Tulkas, before you start giving us all lectures on the age and beauty of the US democratic system."
Which you did, you see.
READING COMPREHENSION MAN. Try it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am sorry, where in my previous post did I lecture you on anything? You really gotta take that stick out of your ass, man.
<strong>
Considering the context, this is pretty funny.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don?t think many people would agree with you. But if you?re able to laugh at peoples death, then all the credit to you. I live with death on an almost daily basis. I still don?t see what's funny about it, as jaded as I am about the whole thing.
Truly, with your admitted vast resources at your finger tips, this forum is the only place you are able to find people who support the war? <hr></blockquote>
yes. Pretty wild, ain't it? And you know what, I have met very few people that do know folks that support the war. And it goes across party lines.
[quote]You really ought to try getting outside, (where life actually happens) and get your nose out the books and away from the computer, if you want to try and find people willing to discuss this issue...<hr></blockquote>
I'm sure I do more in a day than you do in a month.
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
<strong>
Considering the context, this is pretty funny.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah can they make up their mind. Do they want peace or not?