Is Bush Impoverishing America? [Archive]

XyZspineZyX

07-02-2003, 04:44 PM

The Costs of War Hit Home

by Karen Dolan

07/02/03: (War Times) An elected official of East Cleveland reportedly made a plea at a recent public event for Bush to wage war in East Cleveland, as in Iraq, so that its roads, schools and crumbling infrastructure could then be rebuilt. Though said in jest, her remark reveals the desperate need felt by many states and cities for resources to be spent at home rather than on war.

The nation's governors warn that state deficits are the largest in more than 50 years. In the next year the deficits will run between $60 billion and $85 billion. This is between 13 percent and 18 percent of state expenditures.

The New York Times reported that some states have undertaken drastic cost-saving measures--including unscrewing every third light bulb in government buildings, having teachers double as janitors and releasing prison inmates early. Many states also reported having to lay off teachers, raise student tuitions or cut financial aid--sometimes all three.

Pressed to the brink of bankruptcy, states, cities and towns across the U.S. are recognizing the devastating costs to taxpayers of a perpetual war economy. In the months leading up to the war on Iraq, more than 160 local governments passed antiwar resolutions decrying the billions of dollars to be spent on the war while vital social programs face severe budget cuts.

SOCIAL PROGRAMS CUT
Los Angeles' resolution stated that the "cost [of the war] would be borne by the people of the City of Los Angeles, who rely on federal funds for anti-poverty programs, for workforce assistance, for housing, for education programs, for infrastructure and for the increased demands of homeland security."

The National Priorities Project (www.nationalpriorities.org (http://www.nationalpriorities.org)) reports that, based on the conservative estimates of $100 billion for the Iraq war alone, taxpayers in Denver would pay $152 million of the war bill from their federal income taxes; in Atlanta, $80 million; in Des Moines, $42 million; in Detroit, almost $180 million; and in New York City, a crippling $2.4 billion.

According to the National Priorities Project, the proposed $46 billion increase in military spending for 2003 could be much better spent. California's share could put some 570,000 more children in Head Start; New York state could provide health coverage to almost 750,000 of its uninsured children; Oregon, facing the nation's most severe cuts in public education, could fund 7,000 new elementary school teachers and Mississippi could provide 3,000 affordable housing units to its low-income residents.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that the proposed House budget plan includes more than $159 billion in cuts over the next decade to programs for low-income families. Programs such as Medicaid, the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), Social Security Insurance, Food Stamps, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families and many other programs will all be cut.

Alabama will lose at least $1 billion in funding for Medicaid and SCHIP under the proposed budget plan for 2004 to 2013. California will lose almost $10 billion.

Further worsening the situation, Congress is in the process of passing a bill giving somewhere between $350 billion and $726 billion in tax cuts to the wealthy. It has just given an additional $80 billion to cover the first month of Iraq war costs. And it is about to agree to a 10-year budget plan that devastates state funding for critical entitlement and low-income programs.

Karen Dolan directs the Cities for Peace program at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C.

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

Where are the weapons of mass destruction?

XyZspineZyX

07-02-2003, 04:44 PM

XyZspineZyX

07-03-2003, 04:33 PM

Yes, this is why I no longer teach. Couldn't afford it.

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-04-2003, 12:25 AM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:
- Yes, this is why I no longer teach. Couldn't afford
- it.

I hear unemployment is at a high now of 6.4%. Four of my tekkie friends just got laid off. Are you ready for the New Deal?

Hard to believe one man could do so much damage to not one (count 'em) but three countries in little more than two years. We'd be better off having an asteroid hit the Earth.

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-07-2003, 02:55 PM

so Bush caused the stock markte buble and the stock market crash? and Bush made all those dot coms that didnt make money? im not a supporter of Bush, but cmon, lets get serious.

_______________________________________

"Generals dont run; during peace this prompts laughter, during war this prompts panic."

XyZspineZyX

07-07-2003, 03:19 PM

Olegious wrote:
- so Bush caused the stock markte buble and the stock
- market crash? and Bush made all those dot coms that
- didnt make money? im not a supporter of Bush, but
- cmon, lets get serious.

You draw a false conclusion and ridicule it? I think you are not being serious. Bush has made it all but impossible for the economy to recover. Instead of printing money and attacking Iraq he might as well have taken half the productive capacity of the US out to the desert and blown it up. It would have been cheaper and cost less lives.

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:11 AM

It's funny since our economy started to fall in 1998. But it's still Bush's fault, the economy must have sensed that Bush will win, and started to act accordingly. Damn evil Bush.

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:13 AM

It's cool that you post all this political crap on the forums and all, but since you rarely even give your own opinion, I can't see why this isn't just spam. You didn't even write this. Typing 'ABC 123' would probably get locked, and it wouldn't take too much more time to go to cnn.com and copy/paste an article here.

Way to go mods. Idiots.

EDIT: Talking about MisterNiceGuy here. And no, I do not respect you because you have a high rank. You probably got that by putting stuff like this on the forums. Hey, good idea! I think I'll do the same thing and I'll increase my rank by posting stuff I'm too uncreative to write, boost my rank so others think I've written lots of posts, and at the same time avoid getting banned by the mods because they are too shallow to realize this isn't even a thoughtful post. How about this MisterNiceGuy, why don't you just tell us where you get your brilliant articles from, and save us the trouble of going to these forums at all!

<hr width="50%" align="left">c.787
Murphy's Law: If there is a possibility of several things going wrong, the one that will cause the most damage will be the one to go wrong. Corollary: If there is a worse time for something to go wrong, it will happen then.
c.787@charter.net

Message Edited on 07/07/0310:17PM by c.787

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:32 AM

omg c.787, how dare you say bad about MNG?? He will now return fire and bombard you with endless rhetoric that will get everyone around him confused, but feeling that he must know more than them, and soon, you'll be the enemy of the forums!!!!

Anyway, I commented on this endless posts of articles, and I remember Geist did it too at around the time i stopped coming here. But otherwise, at least MNG is mature about his political "arguments" unlike some other people. So disagree or not, I enjoy some of MNG's posts. Just not these boring article wars, *yawn*

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:34 AM

Alright alright, I withdraw my attack. But really, could you at least find articles that aren't constantly saying how bad Bush is? We get the idea. Find a new topic.

<hr width="50%" align="left">c.787
Murphy's Law: If there is a possibility of several things going wrong, the one that will cause the most damage will be the one to go wrong. Corollary: If there is a worse time for something to go wrong, it will happen then.
c.787@charter.net

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:36 AM

Hey hey hey, find an article??? No way!! I bet Hornet, or Geist can find an article not bashing Bush, but who cares?????

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:49 AM

Demon_Mustang wrote:
- I bet Hornet, or Geist can find an article not bashing Bush

Yeah, but they can only find one from a biased source. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:56 AM

Oh, I forgot /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 10:12 AM

MNG: i just dont see how Bush created the collapse, he may have hindered the recovery (allthough this is questionable), but he had nothing to do with the collapse. 9/11 had a huge impact on the recovery and that had nothing to do with Bush (unless you buy the conspiracy theories).

_______________________________________

"Generals dont run; during peace this prompts laughter, during war this prompts panic."

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 12:55 PM

c.787 wrote:
- It's cool that you post all this political crap on
- the forums and all, but since you rarely even give
- your own opinion, I can't see why this isn't just
- spam. You didn't even write this. Typing 'ABC 123'
- would probably get locked, and it wouldn't take too
- much more time to go to cnn.com and copy/paste an
- article here.
-
- Way to go mods. Idiots.
-
- EDIT: Talking about MisterNiceGuy here. And no, I
- do not respect you because you have a high rank.
- You probably got that by putting stuff like this on
- the forums. Hey, good idea! I think I'll do the
- same thing and I'll increase my rank by posting
- stuff I'm too uncreative to write, boost my rank so
- others think I've written lots of posts, and at the
- same time avoid getting banned by the mods because
- they are too shallow to realize this isn't even a
- thoughtful post. How about this MisterNiceGuy, why
- don't you just tell us where you get your brilliant
- articles from, and save us the trouble of going to
- these forums at all!

I get my articles from the Internet. And you will learn to respect my rank. Guards!!! Seize him!!!

As for your petition to the mods - I do not believe I have violated any of the rules by posting articles. I post them because I think they are important topics for discussion, particularly in these troubled times. I did not claim to write this article so I do not understand your covert accusation of plagiarism. Further, this is not a "political" article per se but merely a statement of the facts: a disturbing number of local and state governments are facing bankruptcy and this is a direct consequence of Bush's handling of the country since he took over. I am sorry that this offends your sensibilities but instead of responding with taunts and mockery why don't you explain where the author has gone wrong and why you think this is merely a political ruse to discredit Bush (that is what you are saying)?

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 01:23 PM

Olegious wrote:
- MNG: i just dont see how Bush created the collapse,
- he may have hindered the recovery (allthough this is
- questionable), but he had nothing to do with the
- collapse. 9/11 had a huge impact on the recovery
- and that had nothing to do with Bush (unless you buy
- the conspiracy theories).

Thank you Oleg, for your measured response. Quite refreshing really, considering some of the others I have been receiving.

You are quite right Bush did not create the collapse. The depression started long before he got into office. And while the actual terrorist attack on 9/11 did not harm the economy, Bush's response to it has.

The underlying causes of the current depression began during the dotcom boom with Alan Greenspan's "easy money" policies. Constant increases in the money supply falsely lowered the interest rate creating an illusion of prosperity (a false tech boom). Loans were cheaper to businesses hence thousands of projects to produce goods were begun for which there was no customer waiting at the end. As a result thousands of businesses (dotcoms, tech companies, telecoms, etc.) went under or laid off hundreds of thousands of workers.

What has made this worse is Bush handling of the affair. Bush has allowed Greenspan to continue the policy that got us into trouble in the first place (reducing the interest rate to historic lows) and is now I believe, the biggest big government spender of all time. He has spent 100s of billions on expensive wars and creating new legislation and gov't departments. He is consuming the future prosperity of America. All of this spending has to be paid for and so he is continuing the monetary inflation to finance it (monetary inflation is basically a hidden tax on your future earnings). Plus at some point in the future income taxes will have to be increased to pay for this squander. Now indeed he has cut taxes but a tax cut without a corresponding reduction in spending is like the Fed simply cutting a check and mailing it to you. It is fiat money that is not based on an increase in productivity or the capital stock. It is worthless. And it is no coincidence that this is the longest depression (in its fourth year) since the Thirties.

If that seems confusing think about this. If a fairy went around the country and doubled the amount of cash in everyone's pocket would that make everyone twice as rich?

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 03:04 PM

MNG: the interest rates must be low now to fuel recovery and fend off deflation (inflation as of July 5 was 1.2%). do you want to see an increase in interest rates? i think a liberal monetary policy is the right thing during a recession or recovery. what is worrysome is the $519 billion deficit. i completely disagree with your assesment that 9/11 had no effect on the economic recovery- tell this to the airlines or tourism industries.

_______________________________________

"Generals dont run; during peace this prompts laughter, during war this prompts panic."

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 06:20 PM

Olegious wrote:
- MNG: the interest rates must be low now to fuel
- recovery and fend off deflation (inflation as of
- July 5 was 1.2%). do you want to see an increase in
- interest rates? i think a liberal monetary policy
- is the right thing during a recession or recovery.
- what is worrysome is the $519 billion deficit. i
- completely disagree with your assesment that 9/11
- had no effect on the economic recovery- tell this to
- the airlines or tourism industries.

Good points. Now that's what they teach you about interest rates in the leftist, liberal, anti-American schools /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif but ask yourself this: If cutting interest rates could help the recovery why is it after 13 such cuts we are still in recession? Why is it that Japan cut theirs all the way to zero and now 12 years later are still in recession? Also, what makes you think deflation per se is a problem?

The problem is that all interest rates are, are a price for borrowing. What happens if the government cuts the price of bread? There is a shortage of bread. The results of cutting interests rates are more complex true but they are ultimately bad. The effect of cutting interest rates is to fool businesses in believing there is a greater demand for capital goods than there really is. As a result they invest in unprofitable projects that would otherwise never have been begun. Eventually reality catches up with them and we are hit with depression.

Consider also, that the Fed has only been around since 1913. They immediately began cutting rates and look what happened: The Great Depression.

Now recall I did not actually say 9/11 had no effect on the recovery, I said that the terrorist attack itself did not. It is the response to 9/11 by the Bush administration that affected the economy. The airlines were going down anyway for the same reasons other businesses were going out of business. People were no longer flying for business because there were fewer businesses to fly to or for. Certainly the tourism industry took a hit but the economic recovery does not depend on tourism. Furthermore, any impact on tourism was short-term and not part of a systematic economic problem. Interference with interest rates is. I would like to see a natural floating interest rate, not one set by the government

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 08:08 PM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:

- You are quite right Bush did not create the
- collapse. The depression started long before he got
- into office. And while the actual terrorist attack
- on 9/11 did not harm the economy, Bush's response to
- it has.

And what response was that MNG, going after the animals that did this to us? Bad move you think?

c.787 is right MNG, out of all the articles you have researched funny how the only ones you choose is the ones that seem to discredit Bush. I take it you don't like him?

Its like you're running through an open field of grass and every time you fall you end up on Crap.....you should be able to find something good George Bush has done.

<center>
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-4/146066/HDZUVJETRBTPXHHFKWSU-Roguefear.jpg

If I want your Opinion I'll beat it out of you.

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 08:46 PM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:
- I hear unemployment is at a high now of 6.4%. Four
- of my tekkie friends just got laid off. Are you
- ready for the New Deal?
-
- Hard to believe one man could do so much damage to
- not one (count 'em) but three countries in little
- more than two years. We'd be better off having an
- asteroid hit the Earth.

What damage? I work in the aerospace industry, probably the hardest hit most recently, and we're now hiring many new employees due to new contracts. In addition, if it hadn't been for the SBB's loan to my company after 9/11 we wouldn't have been here today.

It takes time to turn around an economy for an entire nation. To just sit there and nit-pick every little thing is to not see the broader picture of progress down the road. Also, the oil conspiracy theories are getting really old. You liberals need to find some new conspiracies so that I can have some new laughs.

< !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><title>SIG</title><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body topmargin="0" leftmargin="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0">http://www.ckt.com/philip/fritz_blood_nomad_UBI.gif
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="2">--</font>
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="1">ABIT KR7A-R, Antec case, 400Watt PS, AMD XP1800+, Kingston 512MB PC2100 DDRAM(x1), GF3Ti200, SB PCI512, XP Pro(SP1), DX9</font></body></html

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 10:51 PM

Hornet57 wrote:
-
- MisterNiceGuy wrote:
-
-- You are quite right Bush did not create the
-- collapse. The depression started long before he got
-- into office. And while the actual terrorist attack
-- on 9/11 did not harm the economy, Bush's response to
-- it has.
-
- And what response was that MNG, going after the
- animals that did this to us? Bad move you think?
-
- c.787 is right MNG, out of all the articles you have
- researched funny how the only ones you choose is the
- ones that seem to discredit Bush. I take it you
- don't like him?
-
- Its like you're running through an open field of
- grass and every time you fall you end up on
- Crap.....you should be able to find something good
- George Bush has done.

Fine, Fine, Fine! How's this?

Bush Pays Tribute to African Slaves
President Bush paid tribute to former slaves Tuesday, visiting Senegal's "point of no return" for many Africans bound for early America's shores.
Bush then boarded Air Force One for South Africa, the next stop in his five-day, five-nation African tour.

Bush toured Goree Island, the site of the port, with Mrs. Bush, Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade and his wife. The president spoke in grim and impassioned terms about the history of slavery in America, calling it "one of the greatest crimes of history."

He stopped short of formally apologizing for America's role in supporting the slave trade.

Bush visited a slave house built by the Dutch in 1776 and held in his hands some of the same chains that once shackled some 200 human beings per day at their last stop before heading out on their often murderous journey to the Americas.

Bush called the house "very moving, very touching" and said it "reminds us never to forget history."

"Human beings delivered, sorted, weighed, branded with marks of commercial enterprises and loaded as cargo on a voyage without return," Bush said. "One of the largest migrations in history was also one of the greatest crimes of history."

In his speech, Bush said African-born slaves utlimately helped to set America free by awakening a collective conscience. The slaves achieved that by never surrendering their spirit even as the spirit of their captors became corrupted.

"Small men took on the powers and airs of tyrants and masters. Years of unpunished brutality and bullying and rape produced a dullness and hardness of conscience. Christian men and women became blind to the clearest commands of their faith and added hypocrisy to injustice. A republic founded on equality for all became a prison for millions," Bush said.

Despite painful shared history, Bush said the United States and African nations must work together to eradicate disease and war, and to encourage greater business ties.

"We know that these challenges can be overcome because history moves in the direction of justice," Bush said.

Bush arrived Tuesday morning in Senegal -- one of West Africa's oldest and most stable democracies -- the first stop on a tour aimed at bringing a hopeful and democratic future to the continent.

The president views Wade as one of his most reliable supporters in the war on terror and was greeted by the Senegalese president and a full-scale military arrival ceremony.

Wade said African nations need help building their economies so they can overcome slavery's legacy. Bush's idea for a Millennium Challenge Account would give money to countries who promise to move toward democracies and who help quash terrorism.

"All Africans are asking for is infrastructure so Africans can work," Wade said, specifically requesting "heavy military equipment" to help with farming.

After a private meeting, Bush and Wade met with their West African democratic counterparts: President John Kufuor of Ghana, Mathieu Kerekou of Benin, Pedro Pires of Cape Verde, Yahya Jammeh of Gambia, Amadou Toumani Toure of Mali, Mamadou Tandja of Niger and Ahmad Tejan Kabbah of Sierra Leone.

Clusters of curious onlookers gathered on dirt roads to watch Bush's motorcade pass by, many standing with their arms folded across their chests, some clapping and waving.

The emotional highlight of Bush's daylong visit to Senegal was the boat ride to Goree Island. Bush and his wife, Laura, made the trip in Wade's presidential yacht.

From that last bastion of non-liberal reporting...
http://www.fox41.com/news/news_detail.asp?id=9099&section=2

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 11:01 PM

Philipz wrote:

- What damage? I work in the aerospace industry,
- probably the hardest hit most recently, and we're
- now hiring many new employees due to new contracts.
- In addition, if it hadn't been for the SBB's loan to
- my company after 9/11 we wouldn't have been here
- today.
-
- It takes time to turn around an economy for an
- entire nation. To just sit there and nit-pick every
- little thing is to not see the broader picture of
- progress down the road. Also, the oil conspiracy
- theories are getting really old. You liberals need
- to find some new conspiracies so that I can have
- some new laughs.

What on earth makes you think I'm a liberal? What do you think a liberal is?

SSB = Small Business Banking?

Anyway, I think you have helped to prove my point (and it is a little more than nit-picking when we are experiencing the worst recession for more than sixty years!). Perhaps your company shouldn't be there. If that loan came from the government then it will help your company at the expense of others (forceful re-distribution in the Socialist tradition). If your contracts are with the government then once again in vampiric fashion you are sucking the life blood from efficient businesses.

What damage? 6.4% unemployment - and its even worse than that. Many of my friends who were employed as tech professionals are now working retail and service industry jobs.

Now I didn't mention oil but since you brought it up - surely you don't seriously believe the right-wing WMD conspiracy?

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-08-2003, 11:24 PM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:
- What on earth makes you think I'm a liberal? What
- do you think a liberal is?
-
- SSB = Small Business Banking?
-
- Anyway, I think you have helped to prove my point
- (and it is a little more than nit-picking when we
- are experiencing the worst recession for more than
- sixty years!). Perhaps your company shouldn't be
- there. If that loan came from the government then
- it will help your company at the expense of others
- (forceful re-distribution in the Socialist
- tradition). If your contracts are with the
- government then once again in vampiric fashion you
- are sucking the life blood from efficient
- businesses.
-
- What damage? 6.4% unemployment - and its even worse
- than that. Many of my friends who were employed as
- tech professionals are now working retail and
- service industry jobs.
-
- Now I didn't mention oil but since you brought it up
- - surely you don't seriously believe the right-wing
- WMD conspiracy?

You may not be a liberal per say, but certainly these articles that you post here are slanted to the left. SBB stands for the Small Business Bureau. How a LOAN could be considered "forceful re-distribution" is beyond me. We're going to pay back this loan, with interest. It just happened that other financial avenues were not readily available hence taking the loan from the SBB.

As for the "tech" industry it was far too bloated and bound to burst eventually, which it did and along with it went those jobs. As for the oil-conspiracy, I was referring to another thread you started. It doesn't really matter if I believe the WMD charge against Iraq because there other valid reasons for going there...

The funny thing is, you have these liberals who've vehemently opposed sending troops over to Iraq for the bettering of national security that now want to send our troops over to Liberia to police the national conflict over there. The double-standards really make me sick.

< !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><title>SIG</title><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body topmargin="0" leftmargin="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0">http://www.ckt.com/philip/fritz_blood_nomad_UBI.gif
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="2">--</font>
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="1">ABIT KR7A-R, Antec case, 400Watt PS, AMD XP1800+, Kingston 512MB PC2100 DDRAM(x1), GF3Ti200, SB PCI512, XP Pro(SP1), DX9</font></body></html

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 12:41 AM

There is quite a large difference between sending over 200,000 US troops to war with Iraq (where the principal reason was that our national security was allegedly at risk) and the possible dispatching of 800-2,000 American soldiers for strictly humanitarian reasons to Liberia (with a stay of only 3-4 months) as part of a larger international peacekeeping mission.

Also Philipz, if it doesn't really matter to you whether or not Iraq possessed WMD and actually was an imminent threat to America, how can you sit here and say liberals who opposed sending US troops there were against bettering national security? I mean, according to you there may not have even been any WMD in Iraq, hence no national security to be bettered.

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 02:07 AM

V3-Dev wrote:
- There is quite a large difference between sending
- over 200,000 US troops to war with Iraq (where the
- principal reason was that our national security was
- allegedly at risk) and the possible dispatching of
- 800-2,000 American soldiers for strictly
- humanitarian reasons to Liberia (with a stay of only
- 3-4 months) as part of a larger international
- peacekeeping mission.
-
- Also Philipz, if it doesn't really matter to you
- whether or not Iraq possessed WMD and actually was
- an imminent threat to America, how can you sit here
- and say liberals who opposed sending US troops there
- were against bettering national security? I mean,
- according to you there may not have even been any
- WMD in Iraq, hence no national security to be
- bettered.

Wow, you know before this administration does the amount of troops needing to be sent to Liberia. Impressive considering the U.S. assessment team arrived there today.

As for WMD, liberals stalled the advancemnet of the U.S. entering IRAQ for MONTHS giving IRAQ more than ample time to move weapons. Furthermore, I do believe that we find something of significance that clearly points to the development of WMD. The fact that liberals start whining "Where's the WMD" only two months after we've entered a completely new country is really sad.

< !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><title>SIG</title><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body topmargin="0" leftmargin="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0">http://www.ckt.com/philip/fritz_blood_nomad_UBI.gif
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="2">--</font>
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="1">ABIT KR7A-R, Antec case, 400Watt PS, AMD XP1800+, Kingston 512MB PC2100 DDRAM(x1), GF3Ti200, SB PCI512, XP Pro(SP1), DX9</font></body></html

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 02:10 AM

Wow, the 9/11 didn't have an effect on the economy?? So one of the biggest economic centers for many businesses collapses, tourism plummetts, airlines almost go bankrupt, none of that has anything to do with the attacks and all to do with Bush? I guess if you're so strong in blaming everything on him, but this doesn't really make much sense. Oh well.

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 03:45 AM

Philipz wrote:
- Wow, you know before this administration does the
- amount of troops needing to be sent to Liberia.
- Impressive considering the U.S. assessment team
- arrived there today.

I said, "the possible dispatching of 800-2,000 American soldiers". I never said such a deployment would in fact take place. Furthermore, the only reason I used that number range was because that was the amount requested of the US by the United Nations who will actually be running the peacekeeping operation. At any rate, I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that the number of US troops deployed for a possible peacekeeping mission in Liberia will be extremely less then the amount used to oust Saddam and occupy Iraq. Overall, the present conflict in Liberia and the situation leading up to the war with Iraq are two totally different matters, and for one to even compare the two is simply absurd.

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 03:53 AM

Philipz wrote:

- You may not be a liberal per say, but certainly
- these articles that you post here are slanted to the
- left. SBB stands for the Small Business Bureau.
- How a LOAN could be considered "forceful
- re-distribution" is beyond me. We're going to pay
- back this loan, with interest. It just happened
- that other financial avenues were not readily
- available hence taking the loan from the SBB.

I am not a liberal at all and I do not think it is fair to characterize this article as either left or right since neither of us know much about the author. But it seems to me that an article criticizing massive central government expansion (as this one does) would be Right of center, not Left.

I will explain how a loan is forceful re-distribution. If, and you did not specify, that loan ultimately comes from the gov't then the funds that supply that loan were forceably taken from the population (in the form of taxes). These funds would have been used elsewhere in the economy more efficiently, instead the gov't used them to make a loan to you. If this Bureau is supported by gov't funds and therefore cannot fail then it has no risk making this loan to you. In addition, if (as you implied) your company was unable to secure private borrowing this suggests that your company really should not exist and is being artificially supported in inefficient operations by the gov't.

-
- As for the "tech" industry it was far too bloated
- and bound to burst eventually, which it did and
- along with it went those jobs.

Yes! Yes! Yes! Precisely my point! And I have explained why earlier with my responses to Oleg.

I don't really want to get into the oil argument here since it is covered on numerous other threads. Suffice to say my position is that every reason given by the Bush Administration falls apart under serious analysis.
-
- The funny thing is, you have these liberals who've
- vehemently opposed sending troops over to Iraq for
- the bettering of national security that now want to
- send our troops over to Liberia to police the
- national conflict over there. The double-standards
- really make me sick.

Well I agree with you here. There is no reason to send troops there (or anywhere else at the present) IMHO.

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 04:16 AM

Your signature scares me so Im not going to post my opinion. Dog man face... AHHHHHHHHH!

<FONT COLOR="#FF0000">
EasyCo</FONT><FONT SIZE="-2">
TEAM GHOST
AIM: easytxco
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-1/94445/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 04:38 AM

Ok MNN, you claim that this loan I received is forceful re-desitribution, but I believe that any American has the right to leave this country therefore negating this argument.

MNN, I apologize for making the assumption that you were a liberal, but I tend to associate liberals with the most anti-American people here in the U.S., you know the same people that believe the constitution is a "living, breathing document". Sure it's o.k. to question the motives of our government, but to do it to the face of the world, really only weakens our countries positions and shows a sign of weakness that has been and will be taken advantage of.

< !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"><html><head><title>SIG</title><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body topmargin="0" leftmargin="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0">http://www.ckt.com/philip/fritz_blood_nomad_UBI.gif
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="2">--</font>
<font color="#CCCCCC" size="1">ABIT KR7A-R, Antec case, 400Watt PS, AMD XP1800+, Kingston 512MB PC2100 DDRAM(x1), GF3Ti200, SB PCI512, XP Pro(SP1), DX9</font></body></html

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 12:39 PM

Demon_Mustang wrote:
- Wow, the 9/11 didn't have an effect on the economy??
- So one of the biggest economic centers for many
- businesses collapses, tourism plummetts, airlines
- almost go bankrupt, none of that has anything to do
- with the attacks and all to do with Bush? I guess if
- you're so strong in blaming everything on him, but
- this doesn't really make much sense. Oh well.

Demon, you know old boy, I think you are finally beginning to get it.

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 12:44 PM

Philipz wrote:
- Ok MNN, you claim that this loan I received is
- forceful re-desitribution, but I believe that any
- American has the right to leave this country
- therefore negating this argument.

I just want to say this Philipz, by making this argument it is a purely in an economical sense. I do not mean to imply that your work is worthless or should not be done, merely that in a general sense I am opposed to any intervention by the gov't in the free market. As far as the right to leave I might agree with you except for one thing. Did you know that even if you leave the US you would still have to pay income taxes? And customs duties if you come back? The government follows you everywhere.
-
- MNN, I apologize for making the assumption that you
- were a liberal, but I tend to associate liberals
- with the most anti-American people here in the U.S.,
- you know the same people that believe the
- constitution is a "living, breathing document".
- Sure it's o.k. to question the motives of our
- government, but to do it to the face of the world,
- really only weakens our countries positions and
- shows a sign of weakness that has been and will be
- taken advantage of.

Its all good!

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

Message Edited on 07/09/0312:14PM by MisterNiceGuy

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 03:46 PM

You saying I get it or I don't get it really doesn't say anything about whether or not I do, so you might as well skip "assessing" people's coherance on these boards until your opinion actually has any weight, but just like anyone else on these forums, I don't see that anywhere in the near future. So save your digital breath. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 04:17 PM

Demon_Mustang wrote:
- You saying I get it or I don't get it really doesn't
- say anything about whether or not I do, so you might
- as well skip "assessing" people's coherance on these
- boards until your opinion actually has any weight,
- but just like anyone else on these forums, I don't
- see that anywhere in the near future. So save your
- digital breath./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

If not for the smiley Demon I might think you were angry at me. Then I would have to let the man in my sig bite your leg off.

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 07:26 PM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:
- If not for the smiley Demon I might think you were
- angry at me. Then I would have to let the man in my
- sig bite your leg off.

...or an ear /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
<img
- src="http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.
- jpg">
-
-
- <center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass
- destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass
- destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass
- destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass
- destruction?******<center><marquee>
-

<center>
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-4/146066/HDZUVJETRBTPXHHFKWSU-Roguefear.jpg

If I want your Opinion I'll beat it out of you.

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 07:33 PM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:

- If not for the smiley Demon I might think you were
- angry at me. Then I would have to let the man in my
- sig bite your leg off.

Who's that? The washed up loser Mike Tyson??? Stick a fork in him.../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I do like the picture though. It suits Mikey well.

Well I've enjoyed reading this thread. You mentioned that war is hurting our country...

What do you think it was that pulled us out of the great depression that was mentioned? Do some research...you will find that war stimulates the economy like nothing else...

Exept maybe Vietnam, which could have been extremely short exept that U.S. military leaders' hands were tied.

Sure the war costs money, but you have to look at where the money goes--into the hands of Americans. That's right! It goes to American soldiers, American defense contracters, American construction companies. The money isn't being thrown into some black hole--it's going right back into the American people's hands.

The part about the teachers having to double as janitors makes me laugh. Heaven forbid, we make teachers do any kind of labor. That would be horrible! DON'T GET ME WRONG. I firmly believe that teachers are underpaid and are one of the most important positions in society. It's just that for people that work 9 months out of the year (ok, maybe 10), they sure do have whiney teacher's unions.

Message Edited on 07/09/0302:53PM by Inverted1

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 08:49 PM

Inverted1 wrote:

-
- Well I've enjoyed reading this thread. You mentioned
- that war is hurting our country...
-
- What do you think it was that pulled us out of the
- great depression that was mentioned? Do some
- research...you will find that war stimulates the
- economy like nothing else...

War does not stimulate the economy unless you measure the economy in terms of government production - which is an oxymoron.

A government at war does not produce, it destroys. But if you measure the productivity of the country using GDP you could get the mistaken impression that war stimulates the economy. I have heard the argument about WWII getting us out of the Great Depression and I am afraid it is completely bogus. War kills and not just people but productivity also. As for money into the hands of the soldiers. the government can't even afford to give them enough water, so they get their heads blown off buying it in the market. What makes you think they're making any money?

BTW

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

http://www.nrm.org/illustration/obrien/tyson.jpg

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

Message Edited on 07/09/0304:54PM by MisterNiceGuy

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 08:54 PM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:
- A government at war does not produce, it destroys.

So is nothing worth fighting for??? Try telling that to the families of the tens-of-thousands of Iraqi's who were tortured, raped, and killed.

What about freedom? Is that not worth fighting for? Do you forget where our freedom comes from? Would you rather we had a monarchy, or a dictatorship?

Yes, I agree war destroys. But it destroys evil at the expence of the courageous and the brave.

You are sounding more and more like a Socialist my friend...

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 09:01 PM

Inverted1 wrote:
- What do you think it was that pulled us out of the
- great depression that was mentioned? Do some
- research...you will find that war stimulates the
- economy like nothing else...

Surely your not justifying going to war as a tactic for stimulating the economy?
Your assertion though is not quite accurate, nor is the GD-ww2 era particularly analgous. The reason the US economy boomed so mightly is the war did not occur on our soil. WW@ solved unemployment by sending all the men off to fight , creating a massive labor shortage that forced companies to employ women and minorities in massive numbers. And in the postwar period the US did not have to rebuild, was instead able to finance the reconstruction of much of europe. Of course this all led to waves of race riots in the late 40's 50s, which I suppose you could argue stinulates local economies by employing more firemen, police, window repairmen, etc./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The circumstances we have going today are very different. The 'war' will not have the same impact.

- Exept maybe Vietnam, which could have been extremely
- short exept that U.S. military leaders' hands were
- tied.

How could vietnam have been shortened?
Nukes? What do you mean by 'hands were tied'? Just curious/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

- Sure the war costs money, but you have to look at
- where the money goes--into the hands of Americans.
- That's right! It goes to American soldiers, American
- defense contracters, American construction
- companies. The money isn't being thrown into some
- black hole--it's going right back into the American
- people's hands.
-
And those are the Americans that need the money right?
Not those laughable teachers.

- The part about the teachers having to double as
- janitors makes me laugh. Heaven forbid, we make
- teachers do any kind of labor.

The simple fact that you voice something soooo far of base....
Teaching is one of the most time consuming, demanding professions out there. It aint over when the bell rings.

That would be
- horrible! DON'T GET ME WRONG. I firmly believe that
- teachers are underpaid and are one of the most
- important positions in society. It's just that for
- people that work 9 months out of the year (ok, maybe
- 10), they sure do have whiney teacher's unions.

Try it sometime dood.

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 09:10 PM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:

- Surely your not justifying going to war as a tactic
- for stimulating the economy?

No, I never said or even implied that the war is justified by the need to stimulate the economy. It is simply a by-product, not a means...

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:

- How could vietnam have been shortened?
- Nukes? What do you mean by 'hands were tied'? Just
- curious

You obviously don't know your Vietnam War history. No, I wasn't referring to nukes, I was referring to the Ho Chi Minh trail. Try reading about it sometime. American generals were forced to sit back and watch as the North Vietnamese resupplied. They couldn't touch them. They couldn't bomb the factories that produced weapons either.

Now the part about the teachers...

I happen to be closely associated with teachers. I have several good friends and family who teach at the grade school, high school, and college levels. My wife is in the profession, but hey, I wouldn't know a thing about them, would I?

Message Edited on 07/09/0304:11PM by Inverted1

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 10:39 PM

Inverted1 wrote:

- So is nothing worth fighting for??? Try telling that
- to the families of the tens-of-thousands of Iraqi's
- who were tortured, raped, and killed.
-
- What about freedom? Is that not worth fighting for?
- Do you forget where our freedom comes from? Would
- you rather we had a monarchy, or a dictatorship?
-
- Yes, I agree war destroys. But it destroys evil at
- the expence of the courageous and the brave.
-
- You are sounding more and more like a Socialist my
- friend...

Do you have any idea what a Socialist is? If so then you ought to know that my position is the polar opposite of Socialism.

No my friend nothing is worth fighting for. War brings only barbarism, destruction and death. And do not be so quick to judge monarchy. Are you really so sure that monarchy is any worse than democracy? Democracy has brought us the bloodiest century ever (30 million+) and promises not to disappoint in the 21st Century. And of course that misery came at the behest of war.

As for freedom? Come now you have been listening to too many politicians speeches and believing every word. Are Iraqis now free, living under occupation, curfew, suppression of the press? Are US soldiers now free to simply leave Iraq as they wish without being incarcerated or executed as a deserter? Are you free yet you cannot travel to Cuba, keep all of your income or lock your luggage on a domestic flight?

Some advice: try the red pill.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 11:04 PM

Inverted1 wrote:
-
- You obviously don't know your Vietnam War history.
- No, I wasn't referring to nukes, I was referring to
- the Ho Chi Minh trail. Try reading about it
- sometime. American generals were forced to sit back
- and watch as the North Vietnamese resupplied. They
- couldn't touch them. They couldn't bomb the
- factories that produced weapons either.

You know what dude, I dont know why you like to use these 'try reading' comments. You dont know me from nuthin.
I know the history of the vietnam war quite well thank you very much. Your little tidbit might sound authoritative and acuurate, but its not. 'Didnt' and 'couldnt' are two different things, depends on whhich year and president you refer to. And we certainly did bomb the factories, etc. We just never sent in ground troops. Cambodia, Laos maybe, but not NV.
We actually did consider using nukes. Perhaps u werent aware? Perhaps u are. Perhaps I should condescendingly tell u to go read a book. Perhaps not. Later Nixon was known to get a bit drunk and go off on great tirades about what he would like to do to win the war in gruesome detail, much to the horror of his aides, kissinger included.
I was thinking that perhaps your reference to 'hands were tied' refered to the growing pressure from the public, the international arena, etc keeping the US from building up the necessary ground troop strength (or use tactical nukes) to inflict sufficient losses in that war of attrition to break the enemies will to fight. After all, we bombed the living crap out of the HCM trail to no effect. The defense department spent years coming to terms with this fact. We bombed north vietnam, almost nonstop, from 1965 to 1972. We even hit a factory or two before they moved underground.
So you are right, in an upside down kind of way, our hands were tied, but not the way you described.

And as for your comments about teachers, if you meant them in jest then fine, good for you, you know some so u can mock them from a point of authority.
I used to be one.
Sorry if I took offense to your cute observations.

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-09-2003, 11:13 PM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:
- Inverted1 wrote:
--
-- You obviously don't know your Vietnam War history.
-- No, I wasn't referring to nukes, I was referring to
-- the Ho Chi Minh trail. Try reading about it
-- sometime. American generals were forced to sit back
-- and watch as the North Vietnamese resupplied. They
-- couldn't touch them. They couldn't bomb the
-- factories that produced weapons either.
-
- You know what dude, I dont know why you like to use
- these 'try reading' comments. You dont know me from
- nuthin.
- I know the history of the vietnam war quite well
- thank you very much. Your little tidbit might sound
- authoritative and acuurate, but its not. 'Didnt' and
- 'couldnt' are two different things, depends on
- whhich year and president you refer to. And we
- certainly did bomb the factories, etc. We just never
- sent in ground troops. Cambodia, Laos maybe, but not
- NV.

Hmm Laos. The most bombed country in history. And they weren't even at war with the US. *sigh* ha ha /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 12:36 AM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:

- No my friend nothing is worth fighting for. War
- brings only barbarism, destruction and death. And
- do not be so quick to judge monarchy. Are you
- really so sure that monarchy is any worse than
- democracy? Democracy has brought us the bloodiest
- century ever (30 million+) and promises not to
- disappoint in the 21st Century. And of course that
- misery came at the behest of war.

Lol...

Monarchy! Ever heard of the dark ages? Yea, monarchy...that's what we should go back to.

By the way, there has been far more advances in science, medicine, and basic quality of life in the last 200 years then the rest of history. Do you really think that would have happened in a country that was run by a King???

Nothing worth fighting for, bah! You don't even appreciate your own freedoms. You should be thankful that you are able to voice your opinion at all--I doubt you would be able to do that in Iraq 4 months ago!

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 12:52 AM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:

- You know what dude, I dont know why you like to use
- these 'try reading' comments. You dont know me from
- nuthin.
- I know the history of the vietnam war quite well
- thank you very much. Your little tidbit might sound
- authoritative and acuurate, but its not. 'Didnt' and
- 'couldnt' are two different things, depends on
- whhich year and president you refer to. And we
- certainly did bomb the factories, etc. We just never
- sent in ground troops. Cambodia, Laos maybe, but not
- NV.

Save the "dude" thing for your buddies, eh?

The bombing...

All operations conducted on the trail had to be authorized by the Department of Defence, the Secretary of State, and senior White House officials IN ADVANCE. The north Vietnamese actually knew the exact times and locations of the B52 bombers as they performed their missions. YES their hands were tied...

Message Edited on 07/09/0307:54PM by Inverted1

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 01:30 AM

Inverted1 wrote:
- Lol...
-
- Monarchy! Ever heard of the dark ages? Yea,
- monarchy...that's what we should go back to.
-
- By the way, there has been far more advances in
- science, medicine, and basic quality of life in the
- last 200 years then the rest of history. Do you
- really think that would have happened in a country
- that was run by a King???
-
- Nothing worth fighting for, bah! You don't even
- appreciate your own freedoms. You should be thankful
- that you are able to voice your opinion at all--I
- doubt you would be able to do that in Iraq 4 months
- ago!

It is not clear what kinds of political systems were dominant in the Dark Ages (Gandalf help me out here) but the Age of Monarchy only really came to an end in 1914 - so we haven't even had a 100 years of democracy. I should point out that the foundation of modern science that you appreciate now was developed during the millenia of monarchy and other political systems that you rubbish. It is arguable that since democracy became dominant that we have been going backwards not forwards. It is capitalism that is responsible for the mass availability of technological advances not democracy. Unfortunately the preponderance of new technology has created the illusion that we are progressing as human beings.

You mention Iraq but they are still not free to voice their own opinion or drive freely around their own country without being shot and killed.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 01:55 AM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:

- It is capitalism
- that is responsible for the mass availability of
- technological advances not democracy.

And it is Democracy that allows capitalism. If you have a better system I would like to see it. You see, capitalism is what spawned a middle-class system in the first place. In the dark ages it was the elite few that were comfortable, and the masses that suffered. Do you think you could work hard, get an education, and EARN wealth in an oppressive Monarchist state? Of course there is still poverty in a capitalistic society, but far less then the dark ages. Granted, it's not perfect, but I can't think of a better place to live then the USA. I'm not putting down other countries but I sure do like it here, kwerks and all.

No, Iraq still isn't free, but its much closer to it now thanks to those willing to lay down their lives for others. And they can voice their opinions too. They are free to speak out now--something that was not possible before.

Oh yea, war is good for absolutely nothing. If you had your way, we would all be doing Heil Hitler's right now. Nothing worth going to war over--that is the most absurd thing I've heard in a long time...

You still havn't proved the whole "war is costing us soo much money" thing. What a joke! You just keep believing that...I have some oceanfront property in MO to sell you too!

Message Edited on 07/09/03â 08:57PM by Inverted1

Message Edited on 07/09/0309:00PM by Inverted1

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 02:18 AM

Inverted1 wrote:

- And it is Democracy that allows capitalism.

Not true. In fact Capitalism and Democracy have existed independently of each other throughout history. Furthermore, democracy acts to ****** capitalism over time with the ultimate destination of democracy being Socialism.

You are confusing the Dark Ages with Monarchy. The Dark Ages were a period of time, monarchy is a political system. It does not necessarily have to be more oppressive than democracy.

- Oh yea, war is good for absolutely nothing. If you
- had your way, we would all be doing Heil Hitler's
- right now. Nothing worth going to war over--that is
- the most absurd thing I've heard in a long time...

If we had it my way Hitler would never have started that war in the first place. And since you keep arguing it, what good came out of that war? Nothing just millions of body bags and gutted cities - the most destructive war ever.
-
- You still havn't proved the whole "war is costing us
- soo much money" thing. What a joke! You just keep
- believing that...I have some oceanfront property in
- MO to sell you too!

Inverted you appear to be under the mistaken impression that war is free. Billions are being spent on these wars - if you don't believe me check the actual government expenditures versus the federal budget. And in case you are unaware I should let you know that we are presently in the longest recession for seventy years.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

Message Edited on 07/09/0310:26PM by MisterNiceGuy

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 02:33 AM

MisterNiceGuy wrote:

- You are confusing the Dark Ages with Monarchy.

The dark ages reeks of Monarchy.

Back to war...

So do you think that we never should have gotten involved in WW2? We should have just turned the other cheek when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, is that correct? Did you always let the bully take your lunch when you were a kid too?

MisterNiceGuy wrote:

Inverted you appear to be under the mistaken impression that war is free. Billions are being spent on these wars if you don't believe me check the actual government expenditures versus the federal budget. And in case you are unaware I should let you know that we are presently in the longest recession for seventy years

I never said the war was free, in fact it's a tremendous sacrafice. It is, however, very necessary sometimes...

Sir, your logic is flawed.

Message Edited on 07/09/0309:38PM by Inverted1

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 02:39 AM

Inverted1 wrote:
- MisterNiceGuy wrote:
-
-- You are confusing the Dark Ages with Monarchy.
-
- The dark ages reeks of Monarchy.

You don't really know what the Dark Ages was do you?

To get more specific, however, did you know that all of your freedoms were established under monarchy and are being slowly stripped away under democracy? The Magna Carta, the Rights of Englishmen, the Bill of Rights? Try reading about them some time...

- Back to war...
-
- So do you think that we never should have gotten
- involved in WW2? We should have just turned the
- other cheek when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, is that
- correct? Did you always let the bully take your
- lunch when you were a kid too?
-
- Sir, your logic is flawed.

Perhaps but you have not even begun to deal with my logic. I have made my position on WWII clear, no reason to belabour the point.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

Message Edited on 07/09/0310:43PM by MisterNiceGuy

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 03:00 PM

Inverted1 wrote:

- Save the "dude" thing for your buddies, eh?

You mean you're not my buddy? But you're so charming and friendly. Oh well. Sorry dude, but since you obviously have no respect for those you engage Ill continue to speak and write how I wish without consideration. Perhaps you think my intitial questioning of what you meant by 'shorten the war' was rude or me being a smartass, but I was not intending that, even gave a little smiley and a 'just curious'. But I can be a big fat ****** if you prefer/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

- The bombing...
-
- All operations conducted on the trail had to be
- authorized by the Department of Defence, the
- Secretary of State, and senior White House officials
- IN ADVANCE. The north Vietnamese actually knew the
- exact times and locations of the B52 bombers as they
- performed their missions. YES their hands were
- tied...

mmkay, thats a logistically ludicrous. The US flew an average of 150,000 bombing sorties a year from '66-'69, so your chain of approval would have been a bunch of really busy rubber stampers. Fortunately, you are once again grossly misinformed. But i mean that in a nice way. The decision to bomb or not to bomb rested on one man. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, the guys actually running the war that you failed to mention (secretary of state? kissinger was rubber stamping the war? riiiiiiiight, you know what youre talking about) had to take orders from the president. If LBJ wanted bombing, there was bombing. If Nixon wanted bombing there was bombing. In 1972 Nixon ordered a sustained bombing campaign on north vietnam that resulted in some 40,000 sorties, killing some 100,000 communist troops (who, according to you, knew this was coming) and forcing general Giap into retirement (ailing health).
All the NVA and vietcong had to do to know if there was a bombing campaign in progress was look up (or read a newspaper).
The US bombing campaign was one of the linchpins of both the public and secret negotiations. The north wanted a complete halt on bombing before they would begin negotiations. The US wanted the NVA to pull out of the south before they would stop the bombing. The negotiators hands were tied.
As for the north knowing anything at all about the locations of our bombers, the north had an extremely sophisticated air defense by the late 60s. State of the art radar, SAMs, etc. The could literally light up the sky, and they did. No secret batphone to the departments of defense and state 'bombing authorization rubber stamping table' necessary.

Regarding the term 'dark ages'.
A misunderstanding of historical proportions. It does not refer to a period of european history that, for simplicities sake, completely sucked for everyone. It is an unfortunate term that refers to the idea that roman civilization was no more in western europe, that the roman provinces had all been overrun by 'barbarians', and that a barbarian sat on the throne at rome. Rome itself, of course, had moved east a century at least before rome (italy) fell for the final count (476ce I think), and lasted another millenia as byzantium, whos capital was constantinople (conquered 1453 by the turks). These much sneered at so-called barbarians were not the pagan primitives that some choose to believe. They had been 'romanized' for centuries, spoke latin, were christian, had adopted roman style of dress, customs, etc. But the central govt of rome no longer existed and power now coalesced locally, and europe broke out in petty kingdoms. In other words, the development of the feudal system (and soon after, monarchies) helped reorganize europe and save it from plunging into chaos.

And before one condemns monarchies, keep in mind that democracies assume corruption exists and attempt to mitigate power, disperse it into a beaurocratic quagmire. Very inefficient even at its best. This would never have worked in the medieval period. Every government system tries to ensure the most fit to rule get to wield the power (however the standard varies greatly as to who is 'most fit') and everyone like to think their government is best. Only time will tell.

One last word Inverted1. You wanna debate here, thats fine. We dig this crap, thats why were in an off topic forum. You wnat to assume everyone here is a moron and you're here to shed some light on us, the intellectual worms that we are, thats your mistake to make. Have a nice day. But not because I said so/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 03:05 PM

Is Bush Improverishing America?

Ehh Nope. The Liberal Democrats are doing a pretty good job at that.

<center>
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-4/146066/HDZUVJETRBTPXHHFKWSU-Roguefear.jpg

If I want your Opinion I'll beat it out of you.

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 03:29 PM

Gandalf,

Thank you for the explanation of the Dark Ages. Am I correct in stating that the reason for it being called such is because we know so little about the period (hence not much "light" being shed on what happened during that time). Also can you tell us when this period actually occurred (my understanding is approx 400 - 700 AD)?

Cheers mate! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 03:33 PM

MNG: getting back to the economic questions. one, i dont think Japan is a good comparison for the USA, while its true that Japan's interest rates are almost 0 and theyre still in recession, their situation is quiet a bit different from the US: 1. their recession was a combination of the bursting of the real estate bubble and a collapse of their banking system. and 2. the Japanese population doesnt spend as much money as their American counterparts they tend to save their money, so lowering interest rates doesnt have as much effect over there as it does over here, and their banking system isnt yet fixed, so getting loans is somewhat difficult (from what i hear).

i think a liberal monetary policy during a recession is the best policy. would you rather have high interest rates? what good would this do? it would starve business of capital, increase the value of the dollar (making US exports unatractive abroad). the only good thing that it may do is reduce the amount of consumer debt and increase saving- because i dont know how much more debt the American consumer can take.

_______________________________________

"Generals dont run; during peace this prompts laughter, during war this prompts panic."

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 05:44 PM

I'd just like to say that this is easily one of the best threads I've read in months. Keep it up, gentlemen, but keep it civil. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I'll pitch in when I have something worth saying.

LOL@ Everybody who has called MNG a "liberal" or "socialist". Made my day, they did!

http://www.jc3.homestead.com/files/sig_slackbladder.jpg

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 08:15 PM

The 'dark' is a reference to the snuffing of the 'light' of roman civilization. As I said, the various barbarian tribes took over, struggling for territory, power, influence, etc. Roman catholicism took a beating as these tribes brought their own interpretations and meldings of christian ideals with their own beliefs, and it is during the early period (500s-600s) that irish missionaries/early monks began copying essentially the entire wealth of writings and other literature from rome (including systems of law, government, religious doctrine, history, etc) thereby saving it from the same fate as, say, the contents of the anciemnt library at alexandria.
The darkness also refers to the instability of the immediate post-roman period. The papacy in rome manages to survive and retain its status as the center of catholicism in a series of 'you scratch my back, Ill bless yours' arrangements (although this authority is tested repeatedly over the ensuing centuries until is is finally broken by possibly the single most important individual in the history of western civilization...(guess who?/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif ), and also the success of that annoying little germanic tribe that lent its name to our current favorite european ally, the franks. First Charles Martel stems the onrush of muslim forces with e decisive defeat of the "Moors" in the early 700s. Then another charles successfully establishes his dominion over much of europe and establishes such a massive power base that the pope decides he wants to play too, after all, hes gods rep on earth, and the holy roman empire is established christmas day, 800ce, with the crowning of charlemagne by the pope, with gods blessing, thereby ending the so-called 'dark ages' and beginning the age of "ruling by the will of god as a king" vs "ruling by the will of god as a pope" and the contest for supremacy between the two continues until... that previously mentioned most significant person in western history pens a few complaints to the local church authorities. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

And I almost forgot to mention, the first appearance of a 'middle class' in a modern sense in europe was during the 11th -12th centuries and is contemporaneous with the rise of towns and a persistent merchant class, as well as the various guilds, so by the 13th century there is a significant european population that is not considered peasant or serf, exists not tied to any ruler or land, has money, power and influence outside the aristocracy, etc. Long before any idea of democracy came along. And it took that long from the reign of charlemagne to get the local stability necessary for such an event because europe was being invaded from all sides from the 8th to 11th centuries: vikings from the northern sea, saracens from the west through spain (in fact, the iberian peninsula was not completely 'liberated' from the muslims until the 1400's, right before colombus' time, even though martel blunted their drive for the complete conquest of europe centuries previous)and the masterful hungarian magyar horsemen from the east(first appearance of the stirrup in europe I think, made the heavy cavalry 'classic' chivalric knight possible).
But now Im just yacking, so to speak... write... hmmm. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

Message Edited on 07/10/0304:18PM by Gandalf_is_dead

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 08:59 PM

Bah!... old history... who cares? Did they have internet those days... I doubt it... Al Gore wasn't born yet... without internet I disagree with asserting that there was civilization on those times... c'mon!... what civilization?... No internet means no pr0n... pr0n is the greater cultural achievement of a community; there are others achievements that help measure the development of culture but those are too abridged and narrow... Thus I'd say the era in history prior to Al Gore was formed by pre-civilized communities.

...

OMG, A quick google' search just show me that there was in fact pr0n before the internet invention!!! (http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/07/09/stonehenge030709)

How those guys surfed and downloaded pr0n without internet... that's beyond me... maybe they had special modems... who knows?... but certainly this could change my position regarding the status of civilized for those old fellows.

Message Edited on 07/10/0305:01PM by Guayo

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 10:58 PM

Gandalf,

Henry VIII I presume?

Oleg, great points!

I should point out several things: 1)we are currently in a housing bubble; the recession is still young and there's lots of time for a banking collapse yet - Japan's banking collapse did not occur until later in the Nineties - their recession started in the early Nineties.

2) If the Japanese population saves more then that suggests that there was no need for a interest rate cut over there since it would have been low anyway. But anyway the saving/consumption proportion is irrelevant to the state of the economy. That's just Keynesian nonsense (trust me).

Its not whether I prefer high versus low rates - I just prefer the government not intervening in the market. Everything they do makes it worse. Left to its own devices the market will set its own competitive rates.

The major similarities between Japan and the US now, and the US during the Great Depression are: low interest rates, monetary pumping, misplaced fear of deflation, huge government expenditure and lots of bollocks speeches by ignorant presidents. That is why this recession has not yet reached its bottom.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 11:03 PM

MNG wrote:
- Its not whether I prefer high versus low rates - I
- just prefer the government not intervening in the
- market. Everything they do makes it worse. Left to
- its own devices the market will set its own
- competitive rates.

I hate to interrupt this party, MNG, but the Fed isn't a government institution. It is a private enterprise and isn't linked to the government in any way.

The government doesn't interfere with business, the Fed does.

http://www.jc3.homestead.com/files/sig_slackbladder.jpg

XyZspineZyX

07-10-2003, 11:43 PM

Slackbladder wrote:
- I hate to interrupt this party, MNG, but the Fed
- isn't a government institution. It is a private
- enterprise and isn't linked to the government in any
- way.
-
- The government doesn't interfere with business, the
- Fed does.

What you have said is partially true. However, there is more to it then just that. You see, the Federal Reserve has a public and private structure that operates independently within the US government but not independent of it. The President selects its Board of Governors and the Senate confirms them, hence you have the public segment or governmental side of the Fed. Then the Reserve Banks and the local citizens on their boards of directors represent the private sector. This arrangement provides accountability while steering clear of centralized, governmental management of banking and monetary policy. Furthermore, although it is set up like a private company and member banks hold stock, the Fed owes its existence to an act of Congress and has a mandate to serve the public. So the Fed is more or less "owned" by the citizens of the United States of America.

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 12:44 AM

Okie dokey.

Cheers for the info, V-3. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

But its still an independant body from the US government. Shares and all.

http://www.jc3.homestead.com/files/sig_slackbladder.jpg

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 02:17 AM

Maybe I should have gone into more detail. On paper the Federal Reserve System appears to be fairly independent because it receives its operating revenues from its member banks and not from congressional appropriations. However, as mentioned previously the Fed is also the creation of the United States Congress, which takes a strong interest in its work and can always revise its charter.

Furthermore, the Fed by nature pays close consideration to the desires of the Executive branch. The Commander-in-Chief usually want the cash supply to flow freely enough to keep the market thriving and will often pressure the Federal Reserve to achieve that outcome. Members of the board more or less don't ever want to provoke the President, and if hard-pressed often cave in to him.

Overall, officers of the Fed have to interact daily with personnel of the Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget. In fact, the board of governors always tries to sustain support from both Congress and the Whitehouse because they realize political resistance can weaken their policies. Simply put, the Fed's legal autonomy does not make it immune from political pressures.

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 02:41 AM

Put simply, the Fed does not produce a product nor does it make a profit or a loss. It is often referred to as a private corporation but it bears no more than a passing resemblance to anything like a business.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

Message Edited on 07/10/0311:30PM by MisterNiceGuy

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 06:04 AM

Hey hey hey, leave my ear alone, you stupid moron!!!

(your sig, not you)

<hr>
--"General Hammond, request permission to beat the crap out of this man." -Col. Jack O'Neill -Stargate SG-1
--Capt. Carter: "You think it might be a booby trap?"
â â Teal'c: "Booby?"
--"I'm a bomb technician, if you see me running, try to catch up" -in Russian on a bomb tech's shirt from "The Sum of All Fears"
--"All my life, I've been waiting for someone and when I find her, she's a fish!" -Tom Hanks "Splash"
--"War is not about who's right, it's about who's left." -Anders Russell

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 12:23 PM

Demon_Mustang wrote:
- Hey hey hey, leave my ear alone, you stupid moron!!!

Come on Demon... you don't need the lobes, what use are they?

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 03:57 PM

Martin Luther.

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 04:21 PM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:
- Martin Luther.

Martin Luther is the most important person in the history of Western civilization? I must know nothing /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

But ol Henry had a few complaints too.../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 05:39 PM

Who would you say it is. And why?
One person. 'Biggest impact on the history of western civilization' is the criteria.
This could be interesting/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-11-2003, 05:55 PM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:
- Who would you say it is. And why?
- One person. 'Biggest impact on the history of
- western civilization' is the criteria.
- This could be interesting

Is this how you used to torture your pupils? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

Message Edited on 07/11/0301:55PM by MisterNiceGuy

XyZspineZyX

07-12-2003, 07:01 AM

Gandalf,

Hi I'm Kurtz...GET BACK IN THE CLASSROOM NOW SIR!!! And thats a complement...

Kurtz

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:
- The 'dark' is a reference to the snuffing of the
- 'light' of roman civilization. As I said, the
- various barbarian tribes took over, struggling for
- territory, power, influence, etc. Roman catholicism
- took a beating as these tribes brought their own
- interpretations and meldings of christian ideals
- with their own beliefs, and it is during the early
- period (500s-600s) that irish missionaries/early
- monks began copying essentially the entire wealth of
- writings and other literature from rome (including
- systems of law, government, religious doctrine,
- history, etc) thereby saving it from the same fate
- as, say, the contents of the anciemnt library at
- alexandria.
- The darkness also refers to the instability of the
- immediate post-roman period. The papacy in rome
- manages to survive and retain its status as the
- center of catholicism in a series of 'you scratch my
- back, Ill bless yours' arrangements (although this
- authority is tested repeatedly over the ensuing
- centuries until is is finally broken by possibly the
- single most important individual in the history of
- western civilization...(guess who?/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif ), and also the success of that
- annoying little germanic tribe that lent its name to
- our current favorite european ally, the franks.
- First Charles Martel stems the onrush of muslim
- forces with e decisive defeat of the "Moors" in the
- early 700s. Then another charles successfully
- establishes his dominion over much of europe and
- establishes such a massive power base that the pope
- decides he wants to play too, after all, hes gods
- rep on earth, and the holy roman empire is
- established christmas day, 800ce, with the crowning
- of charlemagne by the pope, with gods blessing,
- thereby ending the so-called 'dark ages' and
- beginning the age of "ruling by the will of god as
- a king" vs "ruling by the will of god as a pope" and
- the contest for supremacy between the two continues
- until... that previously mentioned most significant
- person in western history pens a few complaints to
- the local church authorities. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
- And I almost forgot to mention, the first appearance
- of a 'middle class' in a modern sense in europe was
- during the 11th -12th centuries and is
- contemporaneous with the rise of towns and a
- persistent merchant class, as well as the various
- guilds, so by the 13th century there is a
- significant european population that is not
- considered peasant or serf, exists not tied to any
- ruler or land, has money, power and influence
- outside the aristocracy, etc. Long before any idea
- of democracy came along. And it took that long from
- the reign of charlemagne to get the local stability
- necessary for such an event because europe was being
- invaded from all sides from the 8th to 11th
- centuries: vikings from the northern sea, saracens
- from the west through spain (in fact, the iberian
- peninsula was not completely 'liberated' from the
- muslims until the 1400's, right before colombus'
- time, even though martel blunted their drive for the
- complete conquest of europe centuries previous)and
- the masterful hungarian magyar horsemen from the
- east(first appearance of the stirrup in europe I
- think, made the heavy cavalry 'classic' chivalric
- knight possible).
- But now Im just yacking, so to speak... write...
- hmmm. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
- <img
- src="http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.
- gif">
-
- Message Edited on 07/10/03â 04:18PM by
- Gandalf_is_dead

XyZspineZyX

07-12-2003, 03:18 PM

Inverted1 wrote:
- Nothing worth fighting for, bah! You don't even
- appreciate your own freedoms. You should be thankful
- that you are able to voice your opinion at all--I
- doubt you would be able to do that in Iraq 4 months
- ago!

An example of freedom of expression in Iraq:

"Many Iraqis are certain that the resistance is being waged not only by Saddam sympathizers and former Ba'ath officials but by a coalition of popular-resistance forces. The problem is that Iraqis don't know what is really happening in this behind-closed-doors form of democracy because of the newly established committee for press censorship. The US is exercising censorship of the press in Iraq. This means that the media can publish anything that talks of Saddam's years of terror, but they cannot write freely about such current events as Bremer's maneuvers, US inertia to restore basic public services, resistance against the occupation, dissenting views about democracy imposed by invasion, etc."

By Pepe Escobar

07/11/03: (Asia Times)

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-13-2003, 12:52 PM

MNG: good post in reply to me. i dont really have anything to add- i guess we'll just have to see how this whole thing plays out.

most important person in history? here are the nominees:
-Jesus
-Adam Smith
-Hitler
-the guy that invented the steam engine

anyone else?

_______________________________________

"Generals dont run; during peace this prompts laughter, during war this prompts panic."

XyZspineZyX

07-13-2003, 03:36 PM

Olegious wrote:
- MNG: good post in reply to me. i dont really have
- anything to add- i guess we'll just have to see how
- this whole thing plays out.
-
- most important person in history? here are the
- nominees:
--Jesus
--Adam Smith
--Hitler
--the guy that invented the steam engine
-
- anyone else?

The guy who invented the wheel?

Without it we would still be in the dark ages. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://www.desiredfx.net/sigs/files/furiousgopher.jpg
<FONT COLOR="#B8860B"><font size="1">Don't Make The Gopher Furious</font>

Message Edited on 07/13/0309:37AM by Furious_Gopher

XyZspineZyX

07-13-2003, 09:04 PM

Olegious wrote:
- most important person in history? here are the
- nominees:
--Jesus
--Adam Smith
--Hitler
--the guy that invented the steam engine

NOt bad. Jesus is kind of a ringer and imho the only person on your list of greater impact than luther. But I have to disqualify him as godlike being at least, and therefore cheating/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
the steam engine? was indeed inpacting, but there are other far more significant inventions/developments. how bout guttenbergs printing press? the compass? the list goes on and on. SOme of these inventions, developments, ideas, etc are simply steps in a progression or a revised application. True revolutionary actions/inventions/ideas are few and far between.
Adam Smith? had a huge impact of capitalism, but Im dubious of the import of that.
Hitler (possibly my favorite historical personage from an academic standpoint) is quite the character, to be sure, and had a huge impact on 20th century history, but hes a metaphorical earthquke in the annals of time. Not a revolution, an abcess. A seeping wound. His legacy is his scar. Luther triumphed the human condition, elevated the worth of the individual, broke the stranglehold of an aged and decrepit institution, enabled revolutions of thought and deed that forever changed the fundamental structure of western civilization, paving the way to modern concepts of individual human worth, equality, freedom of religion, etc. He made henry viii possible, caused the creation of the groups that later broke with englands church and fled to a new world, shattered papal supremacy and hurled the various fledgling 'nations of europe into a new contest - protestant vs catholic. The stakes? every throne on the continent. Look at england, henry 8, mary q of scots, etc etc and finally, Elizabeth. France, war of the three henries, protestant henry wins the throne but is forced to convert to catholicism to appease the french people. And after years of tearing the country apart to win the throne to boot. Babies on spears, the whole nine. And he converts! But he became king. Ending the valois dynasty and beginning the bourbons, which gives us the famous 'Louis" of france. Who later help a fledgling nation break from the tyranny of their rulers.
Luthers impact overthrew governments, turned the realtionship between man and god on its ear, man and government on its backside, man and himself around in circles, and, if you want my honest opinion, really brought western civilization out of the dark ages and made the age of enlightenment, and much of the thought process that nakes us what we are today, possible.
gotta go, beer's empty. hot today, very hot. pool's 92. gotta get out to cool off/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
cya!

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

Message Edited on 07/13/0308:19PM by Gandalf_is_dead

XyZspineZyX

07-14-2003, 04:29 PM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:

- actions/inventions/ideas are few and far between.
- Adam Smith? had a huge impact of capitalism, but Im
- dubious of the import of that.

Socialist are we? Adam Smith's main axe to grind was against the corruption of mercantilism. In the Wealth of Nations he shows that it is government intervention in voluntary trade that creates impoverishment and prevents the economic progress of man. It is mercantilism (one stop on the way to socialism) that creates huge, apparently unaccountable (though not really) corporations. Not sure about the importance of capitalism? It is capitalism that made the Industrial Revolution possible and increased the living standards of people throughout Western Civilization.

It is the slow march to socialism throughout the Western World that will destroy it.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>

XyZspineZyX

07-14-2003, 09:13 PM

Philosophy and economics separately interest me not at all, and together, well...
But I have to ask, did 'free trade' come about because of Smiths writings or was he simply making observations about trade and enterprise as he saw it developing about him? Did the powers that be read 'wealth..." and collectively adjust to fit or at what point did Smiths work become tghe 'model'?

http://www.speakeasy.org/~mattdp/Gandalfsig1.gif

XyZspineZyX

07-15-2003, 12:39 PM

Gandalf_is_dead wrote:
- Philosophy and economics separately interest me not
- at all, and together, well...
- But I have to ask, did 'free trade' come about
- because of Smiths writings or was he simply making
- observations about trade and enterprise as he saw it
- developing about him? Did the powers that be read
- 'wealth..." and collectively adjust to fit or at
- what point did Smiths work become tghe 'model'?

The powers that be never read Smith's work. Unfortunately they read Keynes's work which is why we find ourselves in the current predicament.

Smith did not "create" the capitalist system rather he merely systemized arguments regarding free trade that had been around more than a thousand years into a argument against government intervention into trade. So yes you are right he was making observations about what he saw developing around him.

The Americans for a while picked up on Free Trade and were highly successful with maintaining it until our old friend Lincoln took the first major steps in US history (besides the British) towards destroying it. Of course he never imagined that Hoover, Roosevelt and Bush jr. could do even more damage. Oh and not forgeting Greenspan.

<center>
<iframe src="http://costofwar.com/embed.html" width="600" noborder></iframe>
</center>

<center><marquee>******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******Where are the weapons of mass destruction?******<center><marquee>