So, you feel our society, culture and gov't is basically worthless? That we have nothing worth propagating to less developed countries? That they're better off as they are?

ianc

Lovely.

Quote:

The US has been the world's model since the US got its act together at the end of the War of 1812. Every nation watches the US. It has become the world's nation builder when US politics allowed it. Democracies don't start wars and they become economic partners in one way or another.

The US has been going down hill since the first coup d'etat replacing the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution; accellerated during the second coup d'etat waged and won by Lincoln and his corporate friends, with complete victory of fascism (modern merchantilism) won by Franklin Roosevelt.

Quote:

The Dem policy of brainwashing is a failure. Sure there are the true peaceniks that have had their emotions hijacked and there are the political hate groups which have become a problem for Dem policy thinkers.

Your post indicates that the sociofascists won, at least in your case.

Quote:

The latest is the rejection of 3 Dem resolutions. The Reps deserve a political ass whooping but the Dem disarray is not how to accomplish it. It was the Dems who were the world's democracy leaders and who used the military to contain and/or defeat totalitarian ideologies in this century before the late 1960s produced Woodstock's generation. The Dems could start with supporting the war against terrorism and not stating they want to abandon the Iraqi people. I really don't think that will happen any time soon judging from the scene going down with Dem Sen Joe Liberman. He's aligned philosophically with Dem thinkers but is currently being attacked by the far left so much they may take his seat. Dem 527 groups have an agenda and no need to appeal to the center. That's how they raise money. They're making it easy to get the Reps reelected without the Reps having to cleaning up their act. The US should have a bipartisan consensus on the current war instead of being trashed by boomers out to relive their youth.

Your support for the War Party is noted.

I feel you are intentionally missing my point for the sake of argument. If you understand how to type cohesive thoughts on a computer, then you will at some point realize what I am saying, instead of rhetorically asking me "...so you mean..."

Or maybe you need it put bluntly, which is this:

How the U.S. has conducted itself in the last six years, may not, at this time, serve as the best example for other countries to follow.

Or do you disagree?

I resemb...I mean, I resent that!

I'm not, I don't think. What I'm getting from your comments are a lot of examples of how screwed up we are, and how hence we are not in a position to educate people or even offer them any advice on how to grow and evolve.

I agree that there are things wrong here and we are not perfect. I assert that our society is a helluva lot more open and offers a lot more personal freedoms than those found in the typical strict Islamic society however, and that people living in those societies could benefit from our influence.

My take is that you don't think this is the case.

ianc

That's entirely possible, but not from government and not at gunpoint.

Provided the unabashed vitriol displayed by our leaders with terminology such as "Your either with us, or against us," no, I don't think this is the case.

As far as my examples: they have a lot of range because they are the same things that we hold as the fabric of our country, yet are being exploited and abused in deference to other societies who do not politically, culturally, and religiously resemble our own.

It's like you telling me I should drive a Targa because it will make me feel more in tune with what I'm driving around - the sky, nature, the city or whatever. But meanwhile, I say I should drive a coupe because I don't care about what I'm driving around; I care more about driving past what I'm driving around, and doing it quickly. ;)

at least you're honest in your opinions.


Supporting a "War Party" by your definition means that you don't believe civilization is shaped by war.. among other things ?

Ron, Pat believes a lot of interesting things. Above, he seems to think that regulation would not be necessary between several private, armed police forces as they attempt to impress their potential clients. I'm actually chuckling so hard I can barely type.

Here is the part where you guys should sit down: I probably am with Joe on the mandatory service thing. That is the case in Israel. There would be MANY benefits. Blue collar and white collar folks would have temporary camaraderie. Both groups would have to learn to make their beds and pick up after themselves. Physical fitness. All citizens would have a massive stake in how quick our leaders are to declare war on other countries. Et Cetera.

You appear to have quite the giggling episodes out here, maybe you should be seen for that, it could be serious.

Private police forces do exactly that now, I don't know of any problems created by that, do you? If you do, please relate them.

Quote:

Here is the part where you guys should sit down: I probably am with Joe on the mandatory service thing. That is the case in Israel. There would be MANY benefits. Blue collar and white collar folks would have temporary camaraderie. Both groups would have to learn to make their beds and pick up after themselves. Physical fitness. All citizens would have a massive stake in how quick our leaders are to declare war on other countries. Et Cetera.

Slavery, compulsory service, and involuntary servitude are, thankfully, prohibited by the Constitution. That's not a protection we need from ourselves, it's a protection from government that might otherwise enslave us, since it has done so extensively in the past, it's a valid fear.

Pat, there are no unregulated private police forces anywhere in the United States. That's the part that seems to be escaping you. You suggest a wholesale, radical elimination of all regulatory authority, and then you talk as if the actual, practical change would be subtle. Kinda like invading a sovereign nation and assuming it will all be over in three months. Smart people who have considered your suggestion and rejected it.......believe they know something about the implementation phase of this plan that you don't.

I have been seen giggling by a lot of people and the condition did not begin with your posts. The folks here on OT who don't know me sometimes think I'm angry. Ironically, I think almost everything is funny. Not just you. Though....you are scoring high points lately.

Yes there are. While I don't know every state's laws regarding private police, I believe you'll find that they are restricted as to where they may patrol, government wishing to protect its' turf, but little else. In SC they're armed, wear uniforms that indicate the company they work for, and that's about it. I can assure you that they do have regulations, and they're heavily enforced--by their insurance and bond providers, not government.

Quote:

You suggest a wholesale, radical elimination of all regulatory authority, and then you talk as if the actual, practical change would be subtle.

Please forgive me if that's what you took from my posts. I think the changes would be earthshakingly radical, not subtle at all. For example, there would be private beaches again, without requiring public pass throughs. My marina in Alameda, CA had to provide park benches and free access for the public, even though they owned the land and paid all the taxes on it, public waterway you see. Naturally, criminals made good use of those laws, they couldn't be stopped at the gate.

There wouldn't be anymore Waco's, no more Ruby Ridge's, no more invasions of foreign lands, no more interstate highways stealing people's land (that had been in families for hundreds of years), and on and on.

No, the changes would be far from subtle.

You are confused about what government does to people; for example, it protects certain monopolies at individual expense, it created the corporation to limit the liability of the individual owners, it restricts competition, favors the owners of one industry over others, and on to a nearly endless list.

Government is the most destructive force on the planet, it's high time it were thrown on the ash heap of history.

Quote:

Kinda like invading a sovereign nation and assuming it will all be over in three months. Smart people who have considered your suggestion and rejected it.......believe they know something about the implementation phase of this plan that you don't.

No they don't, what they have is a vested interest in the status quo.

Quote:

I have been seen giggling by a lot of people and the condition did not begin with your posts. The folks here on OT who don't know me sometimes think I'm angry. Ironically, I think almost everything is funny. Not just you. Though....you are scoring high points lately.

:rolleyes: :cool: