Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fair enough but the fact still remains that a multibillionaire is attempting to do just that and that alone in my eyes makes it worth reporting and discussing.
If you have done any research on Soros you will see that he is either suspected of or outright charged with many nefarious things including the financial collapses of several countries.
Yes he has, and has probably done more progressing capitalism and democracy (as well as US friendly take overs) of nations than Reagan, Clinton, or US foreign policy in general. Those places he was involved with had micro economies compared to any of the majors, and while he is certainly without a doubt a person of concern because of his influence, he is but one of a long line of people with similar aspirations. I mean, even Bush sr. Henry Kissinger and several others have spoken about "A New World Order", which sounds ominous and can be, but at the same time, there is a new world order, one of global economies and intertwined domestic and foreign policy. Does that mean we should assume it is evil or nefarious? I see this as yet another global internationalist wanting more more more, which is what everyone among that group of about 145,000 of the worlds most wealthy people want.
Actually... that's pretty much pure right wing spin.
Well sure, the left seems firmly in his corner and Strel openly stated that that he hopes he gets it done... I guess anything from that point of view would look like right wing spin.
Well sure, the left seems firmly in his corner and Strel openly stated that that he hopes he gets it done... I guess anything from that point of view would look like right wing spin.
Since he has never collapsed a government... no. It's not just that.
Yes he has, and has probably done more progressing capitalism and democracy (as well as US friendly take overs) of nations than Reagan, Clinton, or US foreign policy in general. Those places he was involved with had micro economies compared to any of the majors, and while he is certainly without a doubt a person of concern because of his influence, he is but one of a long line of people with similar aspirations. I mean, even Bush sr. Henry Kissinger and several others have spoken about "A New World Order", which sounds ominous and can be, but at the same time, there is a new world order, one of global economies and intertwined domestic and foreign policy. Does that mean we should assume it is evil or nefarious? I see this as yet another global internationalist wanting more more more, which is what everyone among that group of about 145,000 of the worlds most wealthy people want.
To me that makes it worth the discussion rather than calling him a homeless man predicting the end of the world. Remember the golden rule!!!!
These are the kind of things that if you stick your head in the sand over will come to fruition one day and then people will be saying, what the hell happened, how did we get here.
I think most of us know that, it was just a little pun...
I was just riffing back.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
