I think some of you need to look up the definition of conservatism.
I think some of you need to look up the definition of conservatism.
I called the facists because they are far to the right and facisim is the furthest thing to the right. That is how I view them. If someone were to post a site that had people really to the left then I would called them no nothing hippies.
Some facts are there but not many. It is the way they present everything which makes them a laughable source to quote anything from. Anti-US? Sure...why not? Look at it the other way around it the US is Anti-World.
The rest of the world tends to be pretty liberal while our current administration is really conservative. Put the interest of our current administration up against them and of course they will vote against it. If you were to look at the voting records from the 1990-1999, I bet it would be a lot different.
About avoiding the facts. Once again, I learned from you and your lack of stuff on everything from the economy to the confederacy. :rolleyes2:
getting off topic again guys and the flaming is rising.
redneck you say the US wasn't in rwanda to do somthing about it. the UN were only there in 80 peacekeepers. the un isn't a single nation with an army of it's on. those peacekeepers come from member states. uk, france, us, germany, japan. what prevents a larger number of peace keepers being sent is refusal by these nations. more should have been done in rwanda. like right now more should be done in zimbabwe, burma and sudan. and it is up to the nations in the UN to push to get this done. otherwise it is a failure of humanity.
more needs to be done in this world and not by individual nations with their own agendas but for the benefit of the world. this is what the UN sets out to acheive. yes i believe it should be slimmed down. the veto removed and it's powers strengthened. i would like to see actions not words on forcing the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, on protecting human rights, on genocide, on poverty and disasters. slimming down the UN is the way to make this more effecient.
but i don't believe it is a corrupt system. it is a way to prevent a repeat of two disastorous wars. that is what uni-lateral action can and will at one point lead to. i believe the us needs to come back into the un.
iraq and iran both had a right to be on the council for arms control. iraq having had it exercised against them with great effect and iran who at that time (and in my mind right now) were not considered a threat. libya on the other hand must e on the human rights council to prevent another versailles like problem with her being forced to sign a treaty she had not seen.
the us needs to be "lumped in" with countries that you may count as inferior. because belive it or not you are lumped in with them anyway. that's the way the world works. each of these countries and their decisions will have a direct effect on the us. you cannot set up a higher plateau for the us for which it can shout "we're better than you and can do what we want" because as world events have shown. you can't. and that's the way the un should be as well. we all have to share this earth and the borders we set up in it so we should all share the decisions taken for it.
please if this thread is to continue no more flaming. we need rational discussion. if this does not happen could an admin please just close this thread without anyone passing a warning on the goodness of their judgement *not been having much lunk with these threads)
edczxcvbnm i do hope that first post of yours wasn't racist.
They nationalized their industry--that puts the "socialist" part at somewhat more than name. Likewise their actions regarding 'green space', forests, animal rights, etc., puts action behind the "green" part. An authoritarian government is neither conservative nor liberal, nor is Hitler what you get when you gin up a conservative.Dude, the Nazis were THE most conservative party that has ever been on the face of this earth. Conservative as in they are fanatical about conserving and protecting the values they believe in to the point where they'd murder millions and start wars. The fact they have 'socialist' in their party name means nothing.
So someone farther to the right than you, you call fascist? Well, now that we've got that cleared up.....I called the facists because they are far to the right and facisim is the furthest thing to the right.
Which is why we send them our evil medicines and our evil, evil food when they were very happy dying....Sure...why not? Look at it the other way around it the US is Anti-World.
Well, seeing as you've managed to avoid every fact I've put in front of you, you're learning well.About avoiding the facts. Once again, I learned from you and your lack of stuff on everything from the economy to the confederacy.
Actually, the UN admitted to "lacking the political will".... In many cases, they simply stood aside and allowed the slaughter to happen--while they may not have been able to stop all of it, they didn't bother to even stop what was going on right in front of them.edneck you say the US wasn't in rwanda to do somthing about it. the UN were only there in 80 peacekeepers.
Iraq being the country that kicked out the inspectors, and Iran being the country currently working on attaining nuclear weapons?raq and iran both had a right to be on the council for arms control. iraq having had it exercised against them with great effect and iran who at that time (and in my mind right now) were not considered a threat.
Libya has to be the head of the UN Human Rights committee to stop them from having to sign a treaty they hadn't seen?libya on the other hand must e on the human rights council to prevent another versailles like problem with her being forced to sign a treaty she had not seen.
Wrong. We do not need to be 'lumped in' with dictatorships and islamofascist nations that long for our destruction, nor do we need to lend legitimacy to their actions.the us needs to be "lumped in" with countries that you may count as inferior.
Yes, we can, and we should. That's how Iraq got liberated and Communism defeated. And while the United Nations was created too late to be useless against Nazism and Fascism, the League of Nations had plenty of time.you cannot set up a higher plateau for the us for which it can shout "we're better than you and can do what we want" because as world events have shown. you can't.
In other words, they have plenty of ability to do what they shouldn't do, and apparently none to do what they should. Moreover, there's no reason the United States should continue to support and fund a group that is essentially anti-American. While they have every right to be anti-American, our government should not use our money to pay people to downtalk us.
LAst time i checked redneck the NAZI party set up a Fascist Government.Thus that makes them conservatives.
also for CLoud 9.How is edczxcvbnm post racist?
BTW USA wasn't in the League Of Nations.
Last time I checked, conservatives weren't fascists--unless you ask edczxcvbnm, apparently.LAst time i checked redneck the NAZI party set up a Fascist Government.Thus that makes them conservatives.
I'm fairly certain she was referring to when he said "UN? United Nig...Nations" with a smilie.also for CLoud 9.How is edczxcvbnm post racist?
ones again redneck Fascism is as conservative as you can get.Originally Posted by The Redneck
okay well this will be last pot on the nazis in here before this post is closed. tha nazis were both socialist and fascists. hence their name. public ownership of industry - socialist (but carried out by most war time countries anyway). stealing this from jews - not so socialist. weren't very keen on the whole socialist few on the equality of man either.
that's the end of that.
rwanda and the un..... the un actually has no political will. not being a nation it can't do. it has a collective political will. which therefore means that in-action in rwanda was the flaw of nations not the un. the un is an empty vessel filled with nations. not a nation itself and therefore cannot act as one. the entire world lacked will on rwanda.
iraq being the country which had the vast vast vast majority of it's weapons destroyed. iran while at the time is *alleged* on a nuclear weapons program at their time of appointment were not. libya... is improving, it took resposibilty of lockerbie and has improved over the last years. being the chair of a un group does not mean that you in fact control it. it would be hugely unfair (and one of the reasons for the second world war) to force any kind of action upon them without them at least at first being involved in it.
the us is alerady lumped in with dictatorships and islam. that's what we call this world. the us is in the state it's in because it will not cooperate with multi-lateral action. why you are stuck in iraq with nothing to do but have body bits thrown over your soldiers. why the middle east crisis has perpetuated for so long with very little movement or action.
america is not on a higher level than the rest of the world. it is part of the world and should start acting a such. it cannot go round doing what it likes and thinking that it doesn't need to reap the concequences of what it shows. 9-11 showed that. iraq shows that you cannot act on your own and expect for things to run smoothly. same with vietnam. will it take th detruction of another few thouand lives to wake america up to the fact that it needs to take responsibilty for it's actions and cannot live as it see fits in a world that contains a few billion more people?
the un isn't anti-american. it is a collection of nations from around the world. and so if it must be said. the world is anti-american. why does noone question why?
Anyways im gonna have to stay with Redneck on this one when he says, that the UN doesnt like the US, but im also gonna say the US doesnt like the UN.
I mean look at the countries that make up the UN: China, Germany, France to name some of the biggest players, and if u look at the polls done around and during the Invasion of Iraq, the world sentiment, was "The United States is the greatest threat to world security." And if i remember correctly Iraq, Iran, and North Korea were also options in the poll. Also the UN's lack of wanting to respond to many things, with the force thats nessecary is what most Americans have against them.
On the contrary, i dont think anything has shown that we cant do what we want. Not that we did the right thing, just that i dont think anyone has "checked" the US.
Israel was second. The UN is controlled, and has its nuts grabbed by Islamic and third-world countries. Most of the actions that take place on behalf of the UN are either inconsequencial and virtually un-important (peace-keeping, etc), and others have a blatant anti-western taste to them. Therefore, the UN shouldn't be taken too seriously at this point in history."The United States is the greatest threat to world security."
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
So the UN is an 'empty vessel' that has no political will, and therefore had to deliberately stand aside and allow a slaughter?rwanda and the un..... the un actually has no political will. not being a nation it can't do. it has a collective political will. which therefore means that in-action in rwanda was the flaw of nations not the un. the un is an empty vessel filled with nations. not a nation itself and therefore cannot act as one.
So apparently Iraq destroyed all of its weapons and then kept kicking the UN inspectors out and fooled the intelligence network of every nation that had an intelligence network into thinking they were still there just because it wanted to be contrary?iraq being the country which had the vast vast vast majority of it's weapons destroyed.
"Alleged" now means "possibly not enough evidence to convince OJ's Jury"?ran while at the time is *alleged* on a nuclear weapons program at their time of appointment were not.
If Libya has improved, it ain't been by much. And while being the chair of a UN group does indeed not mean that you control it, it does mean that you lead it, and have a large amount of influence with that group. And if forcing Libya to acknowledge the humanity of its citizens whether it wants to or not is unfair to Libya's government... who cares? Screw 'em. However, the UN putting Libya at the leadership of the Human Rights Committee proves that they have no real interest in promoting human rights.libya... is improving, it took resposibilty of lockerbie and has improved over the last years. being the chair of a un group does not mean that you in fact control it. it would be hugely unfair (and one of the reasons for the second world war) to force any kind of action upon them without them at least at first being involved in it.
It's why we brought freedom to Iraq, and the UN didn't. That may indeed cause problems for the UN... tough luck, they had their chance to fix the problem and they defended a genocidal dictator to protect their oil contracts.the us is in the state it's in because it will not cooperate with multi-lateral action. why you are stuck in iraq with nothing to do but have body bits thrown over your soldiers.
We feed the world, we defend the world, and American-designed technology uplifts the world. Yes, we are on a higher level than the rest of the world.america is not on a higher level than the rest of the world.
9-11 was a 'consecqence' of what America 'sewed'? That is not only blatantly false, but disgusting.it cannot go round doing what it likes and thinking that it doesn't need to reap the concequences of what it shows. 9-11 showed that.
Well though i think its a tasteless statement, RN he may be right, just not for the reasons he provided. We did train Bin Laden, and the people of Al Qaeda when they fought the Soviet Union, so i just u could say our creation came back and bit us in the ass.
Meh. We dont have to question why. Thats the problem the rest of the world faces. We in the United States are critical to every aspect of the world, we are everywhere and have our hands in everything that goes on all the time.
We did train people in Afghanistan, but there were two groups of people fighting the Soviet Union.We did train Bin Laden, and the people of Al Qaeda when they fought the Soviet Union, so i just u could say our creation came back and bit us in the ass.
People native to Afghanistan recieved training, some support, and weapons (including the famous Stinger shoulder-fired rocket) from the US. The other group was called Afghan Arabs--Arabs from other lands who came to Afghanistan to fight off the Infidel. We didn't help them for a few reasons--primary among them is that they'd shoot us if we tried.
There were two operatives directing the CIA's operations in that area, and while both of them had a large part in funding various groups, neither had any recollection of working with bin Laden.
Bin Laden commanded no troops, stayed in Afghanistan (EDIT--stayed in PAKISTAN, where the war was not taking place), and even then hated America so much that Americans passing by his compounds were instructed not to speak english because they would be attacked if someone overheard them.
So not only would funding bin Laden have come back to bite us, but it wouldn't have done any good in the first place, because he wasn't doing any fighting.
Last edited by The Redneck; 05-09-2005 at 05:57 AM.
"We feed the world, we defend the world, and American-designed technology uplifts the world. Yes, we are on a higher level than the rest of the world."
That, in my opinion, is why we are also universally reviled by the rest of the world. America, like every other country has little clout left to take the moral high ground on anything anymore since we're just as guilty in countless genocides that go on unchecked in Africa, in South America and in Central America.
Instead of considering that we are the highest forms of humanity on the planet, I think it would be wise for all of us, especially Americans, to attempt to live up to the ideals for which we try to represent.
Take care all.
Nah. I just like making ackward jokes of that sort. Throws people off from what they expect.
Posting Permissions
