Subject:
|
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Mar 2003 05:01:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
843 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > > Yes. I can't think of a plausible reason to think that we are more
> > > concerned with doing good than _everyone_ else. I think that all people are
> > > motivated by their own interests which means that any country or society
> > > will have "good" and "bad" people.
> > Pretty cynical. And un-American, I might add.
> It's unamerican to think that people are self interested? Or to think that
> nations are made up of good and bad people? Or to think that America is
> largely like many other countries?
Bingo. That is exactly what I meant. I believe that the US is unique and
special; a shining example of Freedom to the world. I am proud to be an
American, and I believe all Americans should be proud of their country and
grateful for living in it. Because of our greatness, I believe we have a
special responsibility to the world to make it a better and safer place. We
are unlike any other nation.
>
> > Rigged??? Come on. How did those who "rigged" the election know
> > it would be so close in popular vote? The idea is nuts.
>
> Well, they couldn't know _how_ close it would be until very near the election.
> If the planning started far in advance of things, then they were just planning
> for contingencies. Though, it might have been put together pretty quickly too.
>
> Bear in mind that Florida was almost certain to be a narrow margin either way.
> It was a place where some extra-legal influence could be exerted because of
> the relationship of the governors. Also remember that with 25 votes in the
> Electoral College, it represents over 9% of the TOTAL votes needed to win (270)
> the election. If you had to plan for a close race, it would be a great place
> to be able to fix things. There are only three states with more influence.
> Texas couldn't be lost and New York couldn't be won. California would be close
> and was thus hard to plan for, but Bush didn't have an in there like he did in
> Florida, so he went with what he had. It was just a tremendous opportunity to
> hedge the bet. And it worked.
Interesting analysis. If it were true, I'd say not bad for an idiot;-)
> > The problem is that there are many terrorist organizations that *do* want the
> > destruction of the state of Israel-- until *that* issued is addressed,
> > nothing positive can happen WRT the Palestinians and their nationalistic
> > aspirations.
> But how can a bunch of people who aren't even a nation expel the bad among
> them? So let's imagine that 95% of the Palestinians don't want the end of
> Israel. You say they should eschew violence, but how? Do they even have the
> infrastructure to stand against their crazies?
Sounds like they could use some help. Wouldn't you suppose the neighbors would
*love* to assist them in purging the scum from Palestine? Israel would fight
for Palestine like they were her own children! And if we are willing to go
after Saddam and take on the 4th largest army in the world, he'd gladly send in
some troops to help, too.
> It's not extortion to put conditions on gifts. We would not be threatening
> them with violence, we would just be refusing to continue to fund their
> campaign of oppression.
Their "campaign of oppression" is actually a campaign of self-defense. Since
terrorists eminate from the Palestinian populace, Israel is forced to maintain
tight control over them. If this threat were to be removed, there would be no
need for control.
> > > > Depends what you mean by "us". The obliteration of Washington D.C. and all
> > > > of our leaders would instantly create 50 "countries" of some sort.
> > > I'm not convinced that:
> > > a) this would really happen
> > > b) if it did happen it would last longer than a day or two
> > > c) this would be a bad thing
> > Dude, you are sick!
> To which of these do you object? I'd prefer our republic be a bit looser,
> that's all. Since when if having a different political opinion a sign of
> mental illness?
lol, okay, I was reacting to "c)" To say that you are not convinced that the
annihilation of Washington D.C. isn't a bad thing sounds rather harsh....
JOHN
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
164 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
