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.
Along with the rush for global economics comes the rush for all the various neighbors in the global community to protect their newfound wealth. What you and some other posters apparently favor is global war so that all the neighbors do things the way America decides they should be done. I don’t favor the idea of the global version of a home owner’s association even if it’s America making the decisions.
And as far as life’s “dog fights” go, someone let their rabid dogs loose in our yard and now we’re trampling over various neighbors’ yards supposedly hunting them, and we don’t seem to care what damage we do. It’s not good policy to be such a bad neighbor in the global sense. The “top dog” attitude won’t work any longer. The globalists wanted globalism and they’ve got it. Best to change tactics—now.
Please find where I said that I favor global war? I can tolerate you opinions when they have merit. In this case you are all wet !!! I DO NOT favor global war nor do I want to see America be the "Decider" for a 'Global Homeowners Association." Please do not assume you know how I feel about this.
Spiritwalker
Please find where I said that I favor global war? I can tolerate you opinions when they have merit. In this case you are all wet !!! I DO NOT favor global war nor do I want to see America be the "Decider" for a 'Global Homeowners Association." Please do not assume you know how I feel about this.
Spiritwalker
If I misinterpreted your post, I apologize. But I'd need some clarification of your position based on what you wrote in your post in order to fully understand it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spiritwalker
Oil and Global presence=Freedom....Is it noble? Is it right? Probably not. BUT it is the current reality...Life is a dog fight. Always has been....Always will be.
What in the hell makes you think anyone or any administration will ever change that...Look at the history of the world.
Spiritwalker
You're switching topics. And I don't blame you. Please re-read my post. Especially the part about deciding wisely which fights to take on.
I didn’t switch topics, I was showing the absurdity of assuming that political leaders can be trusted to “wisely decide” a war and to show who suffers when those leaders and their “don’t ask any questions” followers choose the “wisely decided” war.
I didn’t switch topics, I was showing the absurdity of assuming that political leaders can be trusted to “wisely decide” a war and to show who suffers when those leaders and their “don’t ask any questions” followers choose the “wisely decided” war.
Okay, then. If the political leaders don't get to decide, who does? Jon Stewart? Michael Moore?
I don't remember anything in the Constitution about the Satirist Branch.
Okay, then. If the political leaders don't get to decide, who does? Jon Stewart? Michael Moore?
I don't remember anything in the Constitution about the Satirist Branch.
Talk about missing the point. If you believe elected officials should make the choice for war and you don’t want to question them on it, then that’s your right to be led blindly, however in my opinion any official who wants to make a decision to use force should be clear, blunt, and HONEST about why we are going and to show the proof for it. History has proven that many lies have been made by politicians to push for war. What’s wrong with asking for proof before the lives of American soldiers are risked? Or do you prefer the lies and then use the deaths of soldiers as retro-justification? "it all started when they shot back at us".
Maybe you should read the Constitution and its history to know that it is We the People and that government exists on the consent of the governed, not that people exist on the consent of the government.
Talk about missing the point. If you believe elected officials should make the choice for war and you don’t want to question them on it, then that’s your right to be led blindly, however in my opinion any official who wants to make a decision to use force should be clear, blunt, and HONEST about why we are going and to show the proof for it. History has proven that many lies have been made by politicians to push for war. What’s wrong with asking for proof before the lives of American soldiers are risked? Or do you prefer the lies and then use the deaths of soldiers as retro-justification? "it all started when they shot back at us".
Maybe you should read the Constitution and its history to know that it is We the People and that government exists on the consent of the governed, not that people exist on the consent of the government.
Slow down there, pardner. Who said anything about following our leaders blindly? Throughout this thread, I have repeatedly stressed the need for WISE decisions to be made by our elected officials. What makes you think that that equals a blank check?
What is happening in this country right now is exactly what the Constitution permits: free speech and elections to throw the (current) bums out, if that is the will of the people. That is what is meant by "consent of the governed". Not summary executions because the Prez talks funny.
Slow down there, pardner. Who said anything about following our leaders blindly? Throughout this thread, I have repeatedly stressed the need for WISE decisions to be made by our elected officials. What makes you think that that equals a blank check?
I’ve looked through your posts and there isnt any comments where you “stressed the need for WISE decisions to be made by our elected officials”. Maybe you have been reading someone elses post and thought you wrote it. Or care to provide examples where you stressed the need for those elected officials to make WISE decision? All you’ve really wrote is how we need to “make total war” or “fight for the right to buy in the free market”. Not sure how you equate that to “WISE decision making”.
To argue otherwise is to pretend that the forces of evil can somehow be convinced to mend their ways through bribery or browbeating. Only an idealist or a child would think that way.
good guys, white hats; bad guys, black hats...
Again, the whole "forces of evil" line makes one think you have been watching too many star wars movies. No one disputes the vile acts of some men but to simplify it down to good and evil... please turn to page 3 of my pet goat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf
Slow down there, pardner. Who said anything about following our leaders blindly? Throughout this thread, I have repeatedly stressed the need for WISE decisions to be made by our elected officials. What makes you think that that equals a blank check?
What is happening in this country right now is exactly what the Constitution permits: free speech and elections to throw the (current) bums out, if that is the will of the people. That is what is meant by "consent of the governed". Not summary executions because the Prez talks funny.
"He sounds dumb! Off with his head!"
Heckuva way to run a country.
No more ridiculous than labeling others as, "forces of evil", but then again, I guess that is your idea of a "wise and thoughtful" decision...
psssst, pass me the marvel comics legions of justice vs forces of evil, episode 4
Again, the whole "forces of evil" line makes one think you have been watching too many star wars movies. No one disputes the vile acts of some men but to simplify it down to good and evil... please turn to page 3 of my pet goat.
No more ridiculous than labeling others as, "forces of evil", but then again, I guess that is your idea of a "wise and thoughtful" decision...
psssst, pass me the marvel comics legions of justice vs forces of evil, episode 4
Okay, Hitler wasn't evil. He was just misunderstood. We should have reasoned with him, right?
I’ve looked through your posts and there isnt any comments where you “stressed the need for WISE decisions to be made by our elected officials”. Maybe you have been reading someone elses post and thought you wrote it. Or care to provide examples where you stressed the need for those elected officials to make WISE decision? All you’ve really wrote is how we need to “make total war” or “fight for the right to buy in the free market”. Not sure how you equate that to “WISE decision making”.
From a few pages back:
"Need I point out to you that it should be our central concern to decide wisely when, where, and against whom we should use military force -- but then when that decision is made, it should be done ruthlessly and thoroughly?
To argue otherwise is to pretend that the forces of evil can somehow be convinced to mend their ways through bribery or browbeating. Only an idealist or a child would think that way.
I am assuming that you are an idealist."
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.
