> I am sure Stalin said a lot of good things, Some people hear
> "Stalin", ---Asgeir---
>> This one little sentence speaks volumes and shows us exactly who John
>> Wallace is. And what an ugly view it is....
>> Stalin and Saddam both hero's while GW is the anti-christ?
>> Sad..
>> Mitch
>>>Sometimes Stalin really did say it best.
> > You are one scary mofo....
> The scary thing is when so many Americans think wholly with their hearts,
> not with their heads. To understand why Stalin was so evil you first have
> to understand why he was so successful.
> Maybe if you and many others could grasp that concept you'd understand why
> America is so despised under its current leadership. History has taught
> you nothing. Because you never listen, just talk loudly over calmer, more
> rational voices.
> Andrew McP
As to comparing the Bush admin to Stalinist Russia, quite the pathetic
thought process you have there.
Maybe if you and many others could grasp that concept you'd understand why
America is so despised under its current leadership. History has taught
you nothing. Because you never listen, just talk loudly over calmer, more
rational voices.
Andrew McP
Is there any difference? -Bush will personally intervene in a euthanasia
case, "fighting for a life" without seemingly realising his policies have
sent thousands to an early grave in an unnescessary war. He's also willing
to step on the weakest members of your society and to destabilise world
economy to save America's big industries' bottom line. And don't me started
on the Kyoto agreement.
Why do we think we're right? -simple, we are able to put our prejudices
aside and compromise on the basis of reasonable argument. Trying to force an
inhumane existance from terminating, while on the other hand expecting
perfectly functioning humans to die to defend a false notion of global
security or statements like "you're either with us or against us", do not
constitute reasonable argument.
Jan.
=---
Is there any difference between someone who starved millions of his own
people to death (and thats just for starters), and Bush ? <laughter> Is
that a serious question ? Interesting how those who don't even live in the
US think they know so much about it.
Advise staying away from www.moonbatsrus.com for a bit, eh ?
Whew, that tin beenie is on mighty tight, eh ?
And you wonder why that part of the world isn't listened to anymore.
p.s. this is putting your prejudices aside though, right ?
US protectionist measures, i.e. dropping the price of their currency and
driving up the price of oil, will cause indirect casualties in the
developing world.
You have no logical argument. You're like the people who point out "yeah,
but it might happen to *you*", when someone says you're less likely to die
in an airplane crash than a car accident. As if that defuses their argument
in any way.
Like I said, it's conditional... show me some reasonable argument.
Jan.
=---
And another thing, just as an example...
After I finished posting my last message I happened to zap across to CNN
only to find the American news anchor asking an obviously rethoric question
to the equally American economic analyst on whether objections to
Wolfowitz'<sp?> nomination to become president of the world bank on account
if him being in favour of "exporting democracy, US style" were justified.
The analyst duly got into a story about how the market was moving away from
caring about macro-economic parameters and on to fighting corruption,
promoting democratic systems and transparency in order to defuse those
objections.
Ok, having been brought up as a typical reasonably independant thinking Euro
(you know, since the 17-hundreds, it's been alright to think for yourself
and question those in power around here... a trait which hasn't, again:
seemingly, travelled well across the Atlantic), it's hard to argue against
that. I mean, promoting democratic values is ok, no question. But extending
that sentiment into wielding your economic and military power to ensure the
succes of the add campaign is OTT AFAIC.
Jan.
=---
Your proof of this assertion ? I won't address the inherent
incorrectness of your facts, but lets see some proof. Not theories, that
means.
<laughter>
*I* have no logical argument ? Show me some proof of your allegations and
your alleged future end results.
You first.
Btw, explain to me exactly how the Bush admin. is "stepping on the weakest
parts of my society". Facts please, and try to answer at least one question
directly for a change.
I'm curious, since you didn't seem so concerned about the weakest parts of
the US society under the Clinton admin. You know, when he and Reno had the
Texas Barbecue, the Florida Fiasco, and the Idaho Adventure ?
Show me one event under the Bush admin. regarding US citizens that is
comparable to those. Assuming you even know what they were, but then,
someone so concerned and knowledgeable about the US as you think you are, it
should be no problem, eh ?
Anyway, I await your facts.
Yes, and you have done so well about it, too, ala all that history has
shown since the 1700's. WW 1 and 2 ring a bell ? And that's just the 20th
century.
I mean, promoting democratic values is ok, no question. But extending
Putting aside the question of whether "wielding economic and military
power to ensure success...." is right or wrong, since you think promoting
democratic values is ok, how would you suggest it be done ?
<snip>
Oh, and btw, you might want to bone up on how oil prices come about.
Hint; try OPEC for starters. History has shown, and continues to do so,
that their prices are usually set for self-serving reasons, not because of
US currency fluctuations.
<laughter>
The last thing the US wants, for it's own self-interests, is anything that
would drive up the price of oil, that's in their control, aka currency.
You're really reaching with this one, but whatever. Good thing you're not
prejudiced though, eh ? <wink>
Your inability to step outside your patriotic indoctrination would make
Stalin proud.
Andrew McP
Mitch
"Andrew MacPherson" > Your inability to step outside your patriotic
indoctrination would make
JFYI, this is just the lovely, lovely mechanisms of capitalism: Demand and
Availability. LOL!!!
I eagerly await the times when oil is so expensive that you americans will have
to let your SUV in the garage and take the bus to work. I *eagerly* await it!
And it is not that far off in the future either!!!
Gas prices are escalating as well, and have reached a point in US where people
start converting to other heating sources. However, this is not OPEC's fault,
simply because they don't control the market. The prices get high because
everyone needs it, there is less and less of it, and US is the biggest consumer
on the planet. And while you americans are concerned with your oil prices, this
planet goes to rot, and you ignore the facts like ignorant heedless children do.
---A---
>>"JP" wrote...
>>>Is there any difference between someone who starved millions
>>>of his own people to death (and thats just for starters),
>>>and Bush ? <laughter> Is that a serious question ?
>>>Interesting how those who don't even live in the
>>>US think they know so much about it.
>>US protectionist measures, i.e. dropping the price of their currency and
>>driving up the price of oil, will cause indirect casualties in the
>>developing world.
> <snip>
> Oh, and btw, you might want to bone up on how oil prices come about.
> Hint; try OPEC for starters. History has shown, and continues to do so,
> that their prices are usually set for self-serving reasons, not because of
> US currency fluctuations.
> <laughter>
> The last thing the US wants, for it's own self-interests, is anything that
> would drive up the price of oil, that's in their control, aka currency.
> You're really reaching with this one, but whatever. Good thing you're not
> prejudiced though, eh ? <wink>
Only a very narrow-minded person would even *think* the thought that you can
force someone into being democratic, or bomb someone into being democratic, or
persuade someon into being democratic. Democracy is a *culture*, and culture
takes centuries to build. Bombs never built culture, except the sick one, where
*** is used as cure for everything.
---A---
<snip>
There is NO proof of 20 million+ starving to death in the Soviet Union. If you
confront the population numbers through the in-between war years, you'll see a
huge, and steady increase from 1929 to 1937, and it would be hard to proove that
more than 20 million people died in that light. But people died from starvation,
certainly.
And, also FYI, Soviet had terrible problems after the revolution because their
country had been abused by the tsar family over a long period of time, and they
had to practically rebuild the entire country because of that. And people were
starving, oh yes, they were, that's why Nansen spent so much time in Soviet
trying to help the few he could, and claiming that Stalin was the direct cause
of the starvation is like claiming that Charlton Heston is the direct cause of
the thousands of gun deaths in America every year!
---A---
>>Some people hear "Stalin", and their petty minds start shortcutting
>>and sizzle, and their minds just produce ***and bollocks.
>>---Asgeir---
> Some people hear 'Stalin' and think of 20+ million people starved to
> death. It is kind of hard to have warm-fuzzy thoughts about anyone such as
> he. So he may have been a good administrator, he may have been a fine
> public works politician, he may have had many fine qualities...but the
> HORROR of his policies completely outweigh ANY thoughts anyone should have
> of this man.
> The fact you seem to admire him Ziggy...is frightening.
> dave(call me petty, I'd choose that over being a Stalinist ANYDAY)henrie
