Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Best to pick a president that will not wage war all over the world and make nations hates the US.

---

Uhh, FYI: Many countries already hated us before 9/11. Due to one thing or another about American (or modern culture).

But the Islamofacists hated us for being Infidels, and a world power, when THEY, being the loyal followers of Allah are the ones who deserve to rule the world. And, Allah is on their side to help them conquer it back for Islam and Allah. There are movements all over the world to establish Shari'ah Law.
And if you die "fighting Allah's battle" you will be rewarded with 77 virgins in heaven, and a free-pass to heaven for all your relatives.

But, you Blame-America crowd are mute on getting to know FATCS about our enemy. You are as un-educated about radical Islam as you are about most things. As the Hindus say "Ignorance is the source of all evil" Well, here, your ignorance about world issues is the source of your "evil."

TO all the LIBERAL NUTS out there:

Its getting old, hearing you parrot this anti-America rhetoric. Blame-America, passive-aggressive derangement.
Sure we are not perfect, but you sound like you are a lawyer for the rest of the world against America.

You do not love America, the country you live in. For example, when you love someone, say, a parent or a child, you can recognize their faults and work on them, with respect. You wouldn't ridicule them for it, incite your friends and neighbors against your loved one's faults, with hate talk and propaganda.

You do not love your country that gave you so much, so if you hate it so much then GET OUT! You should move to those wonderful countries that hate the US just as much as you do. Why are u comfortably installed here, running your mouth?

It seems that whoever coined these concepts, they have spread like wildfire among the passive-aggressive, naïve thinkers.
It is as catchy as it is devoid of any substance.

Hello C:

I don't know. I see that you buy into the dufus in chief's explanation that they hate us because of our culture...

But, nahhhhh... Osama Ben Laden hates us because we had bases in Saudi Arabia. It ain't no more mysterious than that... Of course, I'm just a liberal nut blaming America...

But, before you go there, I wonder how much of YOUR blood you left on the battlefield fighting for this great nation??

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I guess you won't be voting for McCain either.
Best to pick a president that will not wage war all over the world and make nations hates the US.

---

Umm, so: If you hear that a foreign country declares war on another country, does that incite hate in you?

I think most private citizens could care less, as long as it doesn't affect their country.

You swear like all the citizens are studying the international situation, and sitting there delivering moral analysis.

You think other countries are all about morals and ethics. They are about doing what is most convenient for them too. And do we hear France getting hated on, for doing what is convenient for France? Do we hear hate-propaganda against France?

Oh, but America, how dare you watch out for country's self-interests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello C:

Osama Ben Laden hates us because we had bases in Saudi Arabia. It ain't no more mysterious than that.....

But, before you go there, I wonder how much of YOUR blood you left on the battlefield fighting for this great nation???

excon

---

Hello excon:

Yeah, sure, swallow that. That is what you were brainwashed to believe anyway.

Among two plausible explanations, there is one true one, and you need to go educate yourself about what is happening in the middle-east with Islamofacism.

They just sell you this "whatever, don't worry about it" explanation and you believe it.

So, if we DID have bases in Saudi Arabia, is that such a crime that it merits targeting innocent civilians ON PURPOSE?

Do you see how apologetic you are for people who want us to go down?
Should we just be afraid of offending these terrorist and just play appeasement?
You are like someone who JUSTIFIES an abusive husband or a serial killer: "It's that he beat the living sh*t out of you because you did x, y, z. Just don't piss him off next time. OK?"

And your rhetorically charged question about "how much blood" "I" have left on the battlefield. According to what you are trying to say, we should all 100% of us directly fight on the battlefield, well it doesn't work that way. You don't have to be a member of the military to be patriotic. What the hell do you know anyway, about how I went to a recruiter for the Army but didn't qualify medically? Your rhetorically charged question is so disrespectful, especially because I know it is meaningless to you, just a rhetorical tactic.

And I have the highest respect for our military. Those people offer their bodies and the life that runs through their veins for their country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

dufus in chief's explanation that they hate us because of our culture

---

I never bought into that. He may say that because it's the politically correct thing to say and not to incite chaos.

Get it straight through your thick skull: The islamofacists hate us NOT because of our policy, or our culture, but because of our RELIGION.
WE (you and I) are INFIDELS. It is a RELIGIOUS war. It is hard to negotiate with religious fanatics who, are not looking pragmatically for their own benefit, but rather believe these are higher mandates, from God himself.

It is also a political one making it twice as dangerous. They are not just going to preach or send missionaries. They mobilize politically (play the political game) and militarily (where they lack, thus the suicide bomber). They want ISLAM to be the LAW OF THE LAND, THROUGHOUT THE WORD and Allah is on their side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyprine

I'm a jerk and I find the need to cheat because I don't have anything original to say

---

Hello again, C

You got it.

excon

Lol, whatever, to the one above me

You have run out of intelligent things to say so now you play games? Making up quotes on me, How childish can you get?

You are really representing your people well here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyprine

You are really representing your people well here.

---

Who are his people?

The people who think the way he does, as evident from the posts. He had identified himself as a "liberal nut."

I was making a general statement to any "liberal nuts" "out there" (not people in this board specifically) and he came to the call so quickly, I guess the shoe fits.

You can be a liberal, not necessarily nutty.

Hello again, C:

Actually, I caught you at mid edit when I thought you were doing the same thing to MY post. I see that you didn't, but mine was already there... So, I left it...

Call me impolite in addition to having the thick skull you already accused me of. I'll even accept the label of nut, cause it's probably true. But, this nut can kick your right wing butt anytime head to head...

In that regard, I invite you to engage me in the Obama Lovefest thread I got going on. I'm sure we can find some disagreement there.

excon

OK fair enough. You could tack that on if you want to. I personally don't know if you are a nut or not.
But you seemed to make no issue of the big problem of Islamofacism.

A lot of people are alseep on this issue.
Not understanding the reality of the situation in the middle east, they are unqualified to judge what actions are favorable or unfavorable by our government.

Yeah I'll save that Obama Lovefest for later http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/happy/happy0065.gif

Hello again, C:

Actually, I'm a little bit to the right of the dufus. In fact, I DO understand the danger the islamofacists present. Iraq is just a diversion that has delayed us in that quest.

excon

Iraq may have served as a fly-magnet, I don't know. Terrorist groups would feel the most called-to-action against the "American occupier."

And actually, in contrast to what truthtrumpsall said, Iraq was pretty stable before we went in. Sure Sadam did commit atrocities against people who stood against him. But actually he was a pragmatist. As long as you were for Sadam you could get by all right. Women in Iraq were allowed to hold jobs and drive cars, and didn't have to cover their head or wear burkas. There was a large middle class, and modern life.

Iraq may be a chess piece in the whole middle-eastern situation, which is a sticky situation.

IF the Koran really calls for the destruction of the Infidels, and the conquering of lands for Islam, how do you deal with that?
(I have heard the claim that moderate Muslims are simply Muslims who have not really read the Koran very well. I don't know if that's true, or if it's a matter of scripture interpretation).

Since we don't want to single out ALL Muslims, all we can do is count on the help of the Moderate Muslims.

It's better to be proud to be a human being than be proud to be part of a country.
It separates all of us.

C, unfortunately your dreaded liberal nightmare is going to likely going to come true in November. The electoral college prefers Obama last time I heard.

Hahahaha! Now I can sit back and laugh. Obama will take away your bibles, raise your taxes to all oblivion for no reason at all, let your children be raped, start wars all over the world, start to make negotiations with terrorist nations and send nukes to every third world nation. Women deciding what to do with their own body may still be OK, for now. The deficit will raise into the trillions and trillions, he will come find you in the night and eat your heart out! Nations from all over the world will wage war on us and destroy the USA and then enslave your children and send them over to China for cheap labor.

OH NOEZ!

Get real, everyone goes nuts about "liberals" every year and thinks that it's the end of times. Give me a break people, seriously. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyprine

IF the Koran really calls for the destruction of the Infidels, and the conquering of lands for Islam, how do you deal with that?
.

---

You leave them alone and let them do their own thing and quit egging them on, realizing that piss ant third world countries know our capabilities and would strike them into hell if they ever attempted something real and serious against us. Most of it is all tough talk that is rarely if ever backed up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyprine

IF the Koran really calls for the destruction of the Infidels, and the conquering of lands for Islam, how do you deal with that?

---

Hello C:

I don't know. During your Rapture, doesn't YOUR Bible call for the death of all those who aren't saved?? I think it DOES.

How do you deal with THAT?

excon

Wooohoooo! Looks like a new era!

Thankfully.

Obama's Stance on Iraq

Barack Obama will work with his military commanders to responsibly end the war in Iraq. Obama will refocus our resources on al Qaeda in Afghanistan...


McCain's Stance on Iraq

John McCain has no plan to end the war in Iraq, and would keep spending $10 billion a month in Iraq while the Iraqi government sits on a huge surplus. McCain calls Iraq "the central front of the war on terror" even though Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda terrorists who attacked us are getting stronger in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

A new era? Of what? Printing more money we don't have then throwing it at our problems?
Repubs and Dems working closer together to Print more money for more stimulus packages that are really just robbing the poor to give to the already filthy rich?
No, not a new era, just hope. But being the crazy bastard I am even I know hope is for the most part empty.
It takes real substance to build, change or do anything. Mostly just hard work.
Nancy Pelosi, Barny Frank and Cris Dodd are still there. But don't let me pop any ones bubble... no. You enjoy your warm afterglow as long as you can. It will disapate soon enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magprob

A new era? Of what? Printing more money we don't have then throwing it at our problems?
Repubs and Dems working closer together to Print more money for more stimulus packages that are really just robbing the poor to give to the already filthy rich?
No, not a new era, just hope. But being the crazy bastard I am even I know hope is for the most part empty.
It takes real substance to build, change or do anything. Mostly just hard work.
Nancy Pelosi, Barny Frank and Cris Dodd are still there. But don't let me pop any ones bubble...no. You enjoy your warm afterglow as long as you can. It will disapate soon enough.

---

Not being American Mag, I'm not really seeing this from your perspective. I see it as a message of 'hope' to a lot of people around the world who have felt the oppression of the Bush Administration for a lot of years. Those of us who disagreed with the Bush Administration decision to invade Iraq and instead seek an alternative, more potentially unifying and effective solution to dealing with terrorism. I see a chance that observers of the US will be better placed and able to cooperate in bringing about certain basic shifts in attitude and action with Obama as President.

As you rightly point out, it's an imperfect world, and Obama isn't going to make it perfect.

Here's an interesting conversation Mag that you might appreciate. They're in London talking about the US election and how it's been viewed by people around the globe:

The world's American election: a conversation | open Democracy News Analysis

Whether or not you are ashamed to be an American, what it boils down to is supporting the troops that are in Iraq. I spent one year over there and I am DAMN PROUD to have gone over there. It's amazing how people are so loud about their opinions yet, were they ever willing to serve and protect our country?

ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS CIVILIANS!!

Proud U.S. Army National Guard SOLDIER

Thanks armygirl for your service to our country. It is the military that, when all is said and done, guarantee our right to free speech and differing opinions.

It amazes me that some people have opinions of this country based upon who is in the oval office. As a first generation American, I love and appreciate this country warts and all, whether it is Bush or Obama who is president.

Zeitgeist: Addendum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magprob

Zeitgeist: Addendum

---

I saw this a few weeks ago. It was amazing

Wow, that was fascinating.

Zeitgeist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Zeitgeist Movement

While I agree with the overall 'emergent universe' picture presented, there were a few details in the second link that had me asking questions.

Here's one:
Our research has concluded that Scarcity is one of the most fundamental causes of aberrant human behavior, while also leading to complex forms of neurosis in other ways. A statistical look at drug addiction, crime and incarceration statistics, finds that poverty and unhealthy social conditions comprise the life experience of those who engage in such behavior.


Statistics show that drug addiction, divorce and domestic violence are found in all strata of society, while many of the poorest of poor don't engage in those same self/other abusive actions. Unless I'm missing something, the above claim doesn't seem to take this into account.

Another example:
education about life operations will inform people as to the ramifications of their reproductive interests and population growth will naturally slow as people begin to realize how they are related to the planet and its carrying capacity.

Cultural norms run deep as evidenced in China where the one child policy has resulted in more males being born simply because boys are favoured over girls. Re-educating society en masse to shift age-old beliefs has proven to be a mammoth, if not impossible, task.

Just a few thoughts. Fascinating ideas though.

They are on AM radio tonight. Coast to Coast AM with George Noory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frangipanis

wow, that was fascinating.

Zeitgeist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Zeitgeist Movement

While I agree with the overall 'emergent universe' picture presented, there were a few details in the second link that had me asking questions.

Here's one:
Our research has concluded that Scarcity is one of the most fundamental causes of aberrant human behavior, while also leading to complex forms of neurosis in other ways. A statistical look at drug addiction, crime and incarceration statistics, finds that poverty and unhealthy social conditions comprise the life experience of those who engage in such behavior.


Statistics show that drug addiction, divorce and domestic violence are found in all strata of society, while many of the poorest of poor don't engage in those same self/other abusive actions. Unless I'm missing something, the above claim doesn't seem to take this into account.

Another example:
education about life operations will inform people as to the ramifications of their reproductive interests and population growth will naturally slow as people begin to realize how they are related to the planet and its carrying capacity.

Cultural norms run deep as evidenced in China where the one child policy has resulted in more males being born simply because boys are favoured over girls. Re-educating society en masse to shift age-old beliefs has proven to be a mammoth, if not impossible, task.

Just a few thoughts. Fascinating ideas though.

---

They are talking about a future society in which we can overcome the restrictions of scarcity, not trying to find one that already exists. Yes (almost) all strata of society has those symptoms now, because no matter if it's money or bartering, or whatever form of monetary system one has, it's still because of scarcity. The point is overcoming that because of our technology and knowledge today to create a NEW society.

The point of education is exactly to shift beliefs and teach people about new ways of thinking. Society has also shown in time that we ADAPT. You can see how much westernized other countries have become, and who have abandoned old ways of thinking. Many Asian countries are now taking up Christianity, something which was never accepted before; and religion if anything has to be one of the biggest cultural issues there is. People only hold on to cultural norms as long as they believe in them; true and widespread education is what will eradicate those issues. It's not as if we are living in a civilized world now; the one-child system in China IS a cultural norm there, but do you really think it will be that way forever? As we interact with each other, we change, and adopt each other's culture.

We do have a lot to learn but it's not an impossible task, it will just take a lot of time, as people really do slowly become informed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xxariesxx

They are talking about a future society in which we can overcome the restrictions of scarcity, not trying to find one that already exists. Yes (almost) all strata of society has those symptoms now, because no matter if it's money or bartering, or whatever form of monetary system one has, it's still because of scarcity. The point is overcoming that because of our technology and knowledge today to create a NEW society.




The point of education is exactly to shift beliefs and teach people about new ways of thinking. Society has also shown in time that we ADAPT. You can see how much westernized other countries have become, and who have abandoned old ways of thinking. Many Asian countries are now taking up Christianity, something which was never accepted before; and religion if anything has to be one of the biggest cultural issues there is. People only hold on to cultural norms as long as they believe in them; true and widespread education is what will eradicate those issues. It's not as if we are living in a civilized world now; the one-child system in China IS a cultural norm there, but do you really think it will be that way forever? As we interact with each other, we change, and adopt each other's culture.

We do have a lot to learn but it's not an impossible task, it will just take a lot of time, as people really do slowly become informed.

---

I wasn't implying social change isn't possible, since blatantly it is. Social change can come about slowly or all of a sudden. However, just as the spread of democracy has not followed a predictable or even path, neither has the spread of Christianity, economic development, spread of education (knowledge) and technology. Nor is Christianity ever likely to be the dominant religion. I think it is naïve in the extreme to imagine any single vision of the world will be adopted uniformally across the globe through education and/or osmosis no matter how appealing I might find that ideology to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frangipanis

I wasn't implying social change isn't possible, since blatantly it is. Social change can come about slowly or all of a sudden. However, just as the spread of democracy has not followed a predictable or even path, neither has the spread of Christianity, economic development, spread of education (knowledge) and technology. Nor is Christianity ever likely to be the dominant religion. I think it is naive in the extreme to imagine any single vision of the world will be adopted uniformally across the globe through education and/or osmosis no matter how appealing I might find that ideology to be.

---

If you examine how much more uniform the world has become in even the last 50 years, yes, it is completely possible that the entire world could become uniform. It is difficult to fathom at this point only because we have nothing to base our perceptions on but the past and our experiences. The world is smaller than ever and only getting smaller. The reason things have not changed along a predictable path is because it was always changed by a differing area and culture; but eventually all of the communication and sharing of ideas will be blended into all areas and we will all grow together and be able to work out ideas without outside influence, since it will not exist anymore.

While I agree there has been a greater exchange of ideas and an increased level of understanding of each other and what is happening around the world, there remains enormous diversity both within and across cultures.

Possibly because I tend to prefer the notion of a cultural mosaic rather than the American ideal of a melting pot, we seem to be talking at cross purposes, Aries. The American ideal is not abhorant to me at all, and I can live comfortably with those fundamental differences. However, if we were to continue to exchange our differences of opinion for too long, we would probably only give each other a headache :)

Our underlying ideals and hopes seem to be very similar as much of the philosophy of an 'emergent universe' embodied within the Zeitgeist Movement appeals to me. I was mainly questioning some of their research and underlying assumptions, and am wondering how they expect their vision will be realised.

I'm vietnamese, lol. I'm so proud I'm vietnamese to be honest. To me, the vietnamese are very determined and strong. I don't know if I'd offend anybody, but in the France and American's war against the vietnamese, I think we stood up pretty brave. That's what I think. We even stood up against the Chinese and Japanese too!

My country has been through a lot of wars, but I think that war makes people stronger, and more competitive. But no, I don't think war is the best idea though.

I am irish. I would be totally pro-USA. As a world power, the USA has had a proud record, and has endured much undeserved abuse from other countries, and taken for granted by others (continental europe mainly). I was horrified by the events of 9/11, as horrified as any American citizen, and sickened by the sight of mid-east crowds celebrating. The response by the US was measured though at times questionable.
What puzzled me most though was the hostility after 9/11 shown to people visiting the US from friendly countries, mine included. We saw good people, some fellow citizens indeed, handcuffed, arrested, badly treated and thrown out of the US. I associated this hostility not so much with president bush, but to those around him, though as the commander in chief, he did bear ultimate responsibility. I viewed the like of Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, etc, as corrupt, bad and responsible for this. To me they represent the other side of the militant islam coin. It left me with no wish to ever visit the US.
This feeling eased with the passing of that regime, and the hope generated by the incoming Obama regime.

On YouTube, I found a Cheney interview from 1994 when he was defence secretary under the first and much smarter president Bush. He said that removing Saddam Hussein would be a mistake because it would destabilize the whole middle east and increase Islamic extremism and resentment towards the West. Why the heck didn't he follow his own advice when he became president? Not a typo, Bush was a puppet president while Cheney and Rumsfeld ran things behind the scenes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earl237

On youtube, I found a Cheney interview from the late 80s when he was defence secretary under the first and much smarter president Bush. He said that removing Saddam Hussein would be a mistake because it would destabilize the whole middle east and increase Islamic extremism and resentment towards the West. Why the heck didn't he follow his own advice when he became president? Not a typo, Bush was a puppet president while Cheney and Rumsfeld ran things behind the scenes.

---

Oh my Lord.