A really good interview with Roger Waters, it has me thinking...

[BurlyShirley]

http://www.ienner.com/pages/_rock&roll_pf.html/roger_waters_interview.html
(need quicktime)

Roger Waters is a pretty smart guy. He's one of the guys that originally founded Pink Floyd and he wrote most all of their popular songs. I own all of his albums, which are all make some political statements, and the most recent of which all seem to point to commercialism as the root of evil in the world today, basically Americans and other rich nations are so attached to their toys that a simple matter of going to war with lesser nations is no big deal to them, so long as it protects their way of life, or appears to in one way or another. Basically that we're so detached that the deaths dont matter as much as our Jeeps and fast food and that kind of thing.
I can see how alot of people think this way, even people on our board here, and it works fine on a macro level, but I just dont see it in every day, face to face encounters. While it may be true to some extent that we are detached from this stuff, lets not forget that these same Americans get teary-eyed and donate every time they see a feed-the-children ad on the TV. Alot of you guys have this tendancy to bash the south for its attachment to christianity and its hatred of gays and whatnot, but seriously, there is no other place in the world Id rather break down on the side of the road. To say that people are simple, again, is fine on a macro level, because from that view we all just seem to be going through the motions. But religious or not, republican or not, we are all still individuals here, with different thoughts and feelings on everything. I dont think anyone wants people to be dying in Iraq, but most people I know feel its the right thing we're doing over there because they have heard about the crap saddam had done and want to fix the situation. The average american doesnt CARE about oil, IMO. We were brought up with the thinking that freedom is not free and that it costs lives to get it. Therefore Iraq is perfectly justified in most people's eyes. Religion has nothing to do with it. Commericialism has nothing to do with it. GWB, even if he was there just for oil, has nothing to do with it in the minds of many many people. Is this what's ****ed up about the American way of thinking? Or is it really the right way? Should 20,000,000 live in fear, or should 200,000 die so that the rest can be free until they die?
The answer to that question IMO, decides which side of this war you are on.
Again, why GWB went, is now a non-issue to me, because we are there and we cant just leave.

[Westy]

What are your thoughts on Cuba, China, Tibet, Columbia and everywhere else people have no freedoms or live in fear?

[fluff]

I wonder how many actually did live in fear in Iraq.

[BurlyShirley]

What are your thoughts on Cuba, China, Tibet, Columbia and everywhere else people have no freedoms or live in fear?

Of course, everyone wants to see them free, and no, the administration currently isnt handling every situation in the world, because for one, its not capable of doing such a thing, but also it has no legal basis for it. IMO, even if we invented the basis for Iraq's invasion, more good will be done than harm, and Id hope we force who we can to free who we can, even at the cost of more american lives.

[Westy]

Of course, everyone wants to see them free, and no, the administration currently isnt handling every situation in the world, because for one, its not capable of doing such a thing, but also it has no legal basis for it. IMO, even if we invented the basis for Iraq's invasion, more good will be done than harm, and Id hope we force who we can to free who we can, even at the cost of more american lives.

What about the inner cities and other extremely poor areas in the US. Don't know if you have been exposed to much of it but there is some pretty bad crap going on here in the US. Makes sense to me that if we are going to do anything anywhere we need to start at home.

[Toshi]

BS, some day you will come to see that you are being played by the govt. all of their talk about spreading freedom is ridiculous. read the PNAC's own writings on their plan for the middle east, and you will see that the grand scheme is about remaking the middle east with governments that are under our thumb and which in turn supply the west with cheap oil.

the guise of democracy is what we choose because it would be (even more) unacceptable for us to come in an straight-out replace one dictator with another, altho we have not had compunctions about doing that in the past.

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.html?leftNavInclude
http://www.pnac.info/blog/archives/000071.html

from the second link, the text of a speech on the floor by rep. ron paul (http://www.house.gov/paul/) (tx, not sure what party, and an MD to boot):

More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:
1. They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.
2. They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3. They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4. They accept the notion that the ends justify the means—that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
5. They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6. They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7. They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8. They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9. They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and
withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
10. They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
11. They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.
12. They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13. Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should
not be limited to the defense of our country.
14. 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15. They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16. They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17. They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

how can you support such people, BS? they are not conservatives. you seem to be in favor of traditional conservative values socially, and in promoting personal responsibility and fiscal responsibility for the government, yet these neocons only pay lip service to those traditionally conservative values in their frenzy towards permanent war.

[BurlyShirley]

What about the inner cities and other extremely poor areas in the US. Don't know if you have been exposed to much of it but there is some pretty bad crap going on here in the US. Makes sense to me that if we are going to do anything anywhere we need to start at home.

My point is not to agree with the direction that this administration has taken, but put to rest the idea that Americans have no compassion for the situations it has made. Im sure everyone wants the US to be as close to perfect as possible, but if we're going to be asking questions like "Is an Iraqi life worth less than an American life?" I dont see why what we're doing is any less important.

[fluff]

This quote is quite chilling:

"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business." Michael Ledeen in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute.

If you don't know who Michael Ledeen is, go google.

[Westy]

My point is not to agree with the direction that this administration has taken, but put to rest the idea that Americans have no compassion for the situations it has made. Im sure everyone wants the US to be as close to perfect as possible, but if we're going to be asking questions like "Is an Iraqi life worth less than an American life?" I dont see why what we're doing is any less important.

Gotcha, There are a lot of Americans that feel compassion for the situation in Iraq. Personally I feel horrible and a little guilty. I also feel horrible for a lot of other things like the way Native Americans were treated, I blame it all on my mother though. But there are a decent amount of Americans that just have the kill'em all and let god sort them out attitude. I chalk them up as people who live in their pretty little worlds and don't understand true suffering past spilling coffee on their clean shirt.

[BurlyShirley]

BS, some day you will come to see that you are being played by the govt. all of their talk about spreading freedom is ridiculous.

Im not being played by anyone. Im not saying the US went to Iraq with its main intention to spread democracy (if you could read you'd see that). We can sit here and shout back and forth about should we or shouldnt we have gone, but in the end we had an administration who was going to do it anyway. My point here is that the situation is supported because Americans care, not because Americans dont care.

Simple enough for you?

[pnj]

I've got a bike, you can ride it if you like....

[BurlyShirley]

I've got a bike, you can ride it if you like....
He didnt write that stupid ****ing song. That was Syd Barret, the acid casualty. :D

[narlus]

What are your thoughts on Cuba, China, Tibet, Columbia and everywhere else people have no freedoms or live in fear?

exactly. take a look at this page:

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide.htm

how many instances of mass genocide did the US jump in and rectify the situation??? i'm no student of history, but my guess is not many (at least not right away, eg WWII).

[Toshi]

Im not being played by anyone. Im not saying the US went to Iraq with its main intention to spread democracy (if you could read you'd see that). We can sit here and shout back and forth about should we or shouldnt we have gone, but in the end we had an administration who was going to do it anyway. My point here is that the situation is supported because Americans care, not because Americans dont care.

Simple enough for you?
and americans care because they are either being played, or are warped enough to buy into the neocon's grand plan. the funny thing is that i bet many contemporary neocon supporters would have supported mccarthy. mccarthy persecuted communist sympathizers. combine this with "More recently, the modern-day neocons have come from the far left, a group historically identified as former Trotskyists" and you can see how confused the american public really is.

[Slugman]

I can see how alot of people think this way, even people on our board here, and it works fine on a macro level, but I just dont see it in every day, face to face encounters.
Gas prices here are $2.50 ish, yet the sales of trucks and high performance (i.e. low gas mileage) vehicles have barely slowed… we (nation) have the money so we don’t care.

What do you do to conserve our limited oil resources? Do you have a fuel efficient car? Do you take the bus or subway (if you live off campus that is…)? Where are the alternative fuel sources? Where are the high gas milage cars from the big 3 auto makers? Why is it that the Ford Contour’s European twin gets 10mpg better?

Your eyes and mind have to be open to see…

While it may be true to some extent that we are detached from this stuff, lets not forget that these same Americans get teary-eyed and donate every time they see a feed-the-children ad on the TV.
Really? I flip the channel and grab another bag of chips and a beer….

Alot of you guys have this tendancy to bash the south for its attachment to christianity and its hatred of gays and whatnot, but seriously, there is no other place in the world Id rather break down on the side of the road.
I agree... but I believe you, like myself, are a straight male. IF so - you are not the target of their bigotry, so there is no reason for you not to feel safe. It’s easy to feel safe when you surround yourself with other like you (purely on a physical level, NOT calling you a bigot!).

I dont think anyone wants people to be dying in Iraq, but most people I know feel its the right thing we're doing over there because they have heard about the crap saddam had done and want to fix the situation. The average american doesnt CARE about oil, IMO. We were brought up with the thinking that freedom is not free and that it costs lives to get it. Therefore Iraq is perfectly justified in most people's eyes.
Explain to me when exactly our FREEDOM was threatened by Saddam? Hell even Osama Bin Laden has never threatened our freedom. Has either one of them tried to come over here and overthrough the government? Our freedom is dictated by our government… so unless they were planning a coup, they never threatened our FREEDOM.

Our safety – Hell yeah! OBL attacked us, and we went after his – good move. But the links to Saddam have yet to be properly proven, half the time the Bush administration changes their story (or dare I say, flip-flops…) about weather Saddam had connections to any attack on the US.

Religion has nothing to do with it. Commericialism has nothing to do with it. GWB, even if he was there just for oil, has nothing to do with it in the minds of many many people. Is this what's ****ed up about the American way of thinking? Or is it really the right way? Should 20,000,000 live in fear, or should 200,000 die so that the rest can be free until they die?
Exaggerated numbers aside – why is killing the only option you and the Bush administration can see? I’m sure when this is over the “majority” of iraqi’s will agree with the US and the interim government… but only because we killed off those who disagreed. Is that your idea of establishing freedom – killing off those with opposing views?

Again, why GWB went, is now a non-issue to me, because we are there and we cant just leave.
That is like the Dems saying Clinton and the fatty is not an issue. That's crap - there needs to be repercussion for actions taken based on lies that he president has told the public (IMO). I agree that our action in Iraq can't change - we're too far into ti to walk away, but there still needs to be an investigation as to why we went in the first place.

[pnj]

He didnt write that stupid ****ing song. That was Syd Barret, the acid casualty. :D


no sh1t, shirley. he was in the band that recorded it though...... :monkey:

[narlus]

He didnt write that stupid ****ing song. That was Syd Barret, the acid casualty. :D

and the TV personalities also wrote a great song called "i know where syd barrett lives".

There's a little man in a little house
With a little pet dog and a little pet mouse
I know where he lives and I visit him
We have sunday tea, sausages and beans
I know where he lives
Cause I know where Syd Barrett lives

He was very famous once upon a time
But no one knows even if he's alive
But I know where he lives and I visit him
In a little hut in Cambridge
I know where he lives
Cause I know where Syd Barrett lives

And the trees and the flowers are so pretty, aren't they?

He was very famous once upon a time
And no one cares even if he's alive (we do)
But I know where he lives and I visit him
In a little hut by the edge of the wood

Oh shut up!

[BurlyShirley]

and americans care because they are either being played
No. Americans care because its natural for us to do so, given our own history and what we're taught about fighting for what we think is right. They support the administration becuase the administration claims to feel as they do. Whether this is true or not is another issue altogether than what I started this thread about.

[pnj]

What do you do to conserve our limited oil resources?

that is the problem right there. STOP CONSERVING! use up all the oil. all of it.
then, we no longer need to be in the middle east. we can start to focus on some other way to destroy the plant.

:nuts:

[BurlyShirley]

we're too far into ti to walk away, but there still needs to be an investigation as to why we went in the first place.

I see you have completely missed the point of this thread.

[Toshi]

No. Americans care because its natural for us to do so, given our own history and what we're taught about fighting for what we think is right. They support the administration becuase the administration claims to feel as they do. Whether this is true or not is another issue altogether than what I started this thread about.
the administration's motives are paramount, since that determines whether the public is being played, not what the public believes in.

i grant you your original point, buried in your page long paragraph :D, that the majority of americans who support the iraq war do for reasons that they feel are wholesome and patriotic. my point is that this is irrelevant, since it has become abundantly clear that the administration is full of empire-building radicals who dangle the bait of "spreading democracy at any price" in front of the patriotic yet clueless public in order to retain their slim majority in popular support.

[narlus]

No. Americans care because its natural for us to do so, given our own history and what we're taught about fighting for what we think is right.

so please address my questions about US-related involvement w/ mass genocide events.

[BurlyShirley]

my point is that this is irrelevant, since it has become abundantly clear that the administration is full of empire-building radicals who dangle the bait of "spreading democracy at any price" in front of the patriotic yet clueless public in order to retain their slim majority in popular support.

Are they clueless, or are they just weighing positives and negatives? Bush making a profit and a few million Iraqi's gaining freedom vs. Saddam setting pretty and people still being fed to lions. Id take the first of those choices regardless of motive.

[chicodude]

Are they clueless, or are they just weighing positives and negatives? Bush making a profit and a few million Iraqi's gaining freedom vs. Saddam setting pretty and people still being fed to lions. Id take the first of those choices regardless of motive.



I'd have to go with clueless........

[BurlyShirley]

so please address my questions about US-related involvement w/ mass genocide events.
The US was involved in many of the cases mentioned there, but I guarantee if you polled Americans on "Should the US interven to stop the genocide of ____" you'd get a resounding YES. The administrations are at fault here, not Americans or their values.

[profro]

BS, we have too many things in common its getting scary. DH, fishing, and now Pink Floyd. :eek: Thankfully I don't like da Bears.

[BurlyShirley]

I'd have to go with clueless........
Well, you manage to stay pretty clueless given your recent postings, so that's no surprise.

Oh, and he IS your president actually.

[narlus]

it would be interesting to see a survey charitable contributions of different countries, based on a percentage of disposable income (ie, straight income wouldn't work, because there probably ain't many angolans giving $10 of their annual salary when they likely don't have enough $ for basic subsistence). maybe one could look at just western countries. who want's to google for data? would the US come out on top?

[BurlyShirley]

BS, we have too many things in common its getting scary. DH, fishing, and now Pink Floyd. :eek: Thankfully I don't like da Bears.
ha! That's awesome. We really should fish sometime, though. If you like Pink Floyd, then you probably like Jethro Tull, in which case, maybe you didnt know this, but Ian Anderson is a helluva fly fisherman. Owns river and everything in scotland.

[chicodude]

Well, you manage to stay pretty clueless given your recent postings, so that's no surprise.

Oh, and he IS your president actually.



Nope.....not mine.......

[BurlyShirley]

it would be interesting to see a survey charitable contributions of different countries, based on a percentage of disposable income (ie, straight income wouldn't work, because there probably ain't many angolans giving $10 of their annual salary when they likely don't have enough $ for basic subsistence). maybe one could look at just western countries. who want's to google for data? would the US come out on top?
given that the US already doles out a ton through tax dollars, collected by elected officials, voted in by voters who expect money to be put to such use, Im not so sure that data would give an accurate representation of what you're trying to get at.

[profro]

I've dabbled with Jethro, but not in depth enough. I'm a hard core PF junkie. BTW we are floating the Clinch the Saturday after Thanksgiving. You should come down and fish it with us.

[Westy]

given that the US already doles out a ton through tax dollars, collected by elected officials, voted in by voters who expect money to be put to such use, Im not so sure that data would give an accurate representation of what you're trying to get at.

As a ratio of GNP the US gives out a small % compared to most European countries.

http://www.globalissues.org/images/NetODA2003.jpg

[BurlyShirley]

I've dabbled with Jethro, but not in depth enough. I'm a hard core PF junkie. BTW we are floating the Clinch the Saturday after Thanksgiving. You should come down and fish it with us.
Damn dude, I'll be in Nashville with the family for Thanksgiving weekend, so I cant really swing that. Damn! Damn! Damn! Im going to fish the smokey's sometime before Christmas, maybe you'd be down for that...

[BurlyShirley]

As a ratio of GNP the US gives out a small % compared to most European countries.
Does that include the 2 billion a week for Iraq? :D

[narlus]

given that the US already doles out a ton through tax dollars, collected by elected officials, voted in by voters who expect money to be put to such use, Im not so sure that data would give an accurate representation of what you're trying to get at.

The US was involved in many of the cases mentioned there, but I guarantee if you polled Americans on "Should the US interven to stop the genocide of ____" you'd get a resounding YES. The administrations are at fault here, not Americans or their values.

well which one is it?

[BurlyShirley]

well which one is it?
Uh...both? Those are answers to seperate questions. You cant expect US citizens who dont get the intel that the president does to have the same working knowledge of every situation, however you can get an idea of how much money your candidate is giving out in international aid.

[pnj]

floyd sucks after the wall. and I would even go so far to say that the wall sucks too. but mainly because I've heard it to death.

early stuff is good because it's weird but I think my favorite album is animals.

[BurlyShirley]

floyd sucks after the wall. and I would even go so far to say that the wall sucks too. but mainly because I've heard it to death.

early stuff is good because it's weird but I think my favorite album is animals.
No. Floyd sucks after roger waters left the band. The Final Cut (meant to be the last album, hence the name) is my 2nd favorite album. The 1st would be Animals also, tho.

That crap from 1985 and newer is just AWFUL!

[Westy]

Darkside and Meddle!

[narlus]

Uh...both? Those are answers to seperate questions. You cant expect US citizens who dont get the intel that the president does to have the same working knowledge of every situation, however you can get an idea of how much money your candidate is giving out in international aid.

ok, i can see yr argument. but i still think that it's a bit suspect to think that the is a strong correlation between the average american joe who wants to give out largesse via tax money and the govt actually doling it out. it's used for political reasons (not that there is anything wrong w/ that), not charity. i still think that my suggestion would be a better indicator of just how generous person X is.

[narlus]

btw, floyd started to go downhill at _wish you were here_ and never recovered...best lp for my listening is _obscured by clouds_ or _meddle_.

[pnj]

Darkside and Meddle!

one of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

:evil:

[BurlyShirley]

btw, floyd started to go downhill at _wish you were here_ and never recovered...best lp for my listening is _obscured by clouds_ or _meddle_.
You're crazy yo! Animals owns.

[Toshi]

Are they clueless, or are they just weighing positives and negatives? Bush making a profit and a few million Iraqi's gaining freedom vs. Saddam setting pretty and people still being fed to lions. Id take the first of those choices regardless of motive.
clueless. (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/10/22/divide_seen_in_voter_knowledge/)

A large majority of self-identified Bush voters polled believe Saddam Hussein provided "substantial support" to Al Qaeda, and 47 percent believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction before the US invasion. Among the president's supporters, 57 percent queried think international public opinion favors Bush's reelection, and 51 percent believe that most Islamic countries support "US-led efforts to fight terrorism."

No weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, the Sept. 11 Commission found no evidence of substantial Iraqi support for Al Qaeda, and international public opinion polls have shown widespread opposition to Bush's reelection.

In contrast, among Kerry supporters polled only 26 percent think Iraq had such weapons, 30 percent say Iraq was linked to Al Qaeda, and 1 percent said foreign public opinion favors Bush.

The polls results, said Steven Kull, the head of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, which conducted the survey, showed that Americans are so polarized two weeks before the election that many lack even a common understanding of the facts.

"It is rather unique the extent to which we have different perceptions of reality," Kull said.

On other international issues, the survey found that around 70 percent of Bush supporters responding believe that the president supports participation in the land mine treaty and the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty, and a narrower majority believes he supports the International Criminal Court and Kyoto Accords. In fact, Bush opposes all four treaties.

Kerry supporters correctly identified their candidate's position on every foreign policy issue in the survey except defense spending. Only 43 percent of the Democrat's supporters know he wants to keep the Pentagon budget at the same level rather than cut or expand it.

[BurlyShirley]

So, since Kerry also supported the war, we can basically say that 25% of Americans put 2 and 2 together in lumping Saddam and Osama together.

[narlus]

You're crazy yo! Animals owns.

maybe i'll listen to it on the drive in tomorrow. i dug it a lot back in the day, but it's a bit long-winded really ("echoes" is where they perfected the long song format). _the wall_ though is just over the top shrill waters stuff. very overrated, imo.

heh, just listening to the kool keith _diesel truckers_ now and he namechecked bobby orr. how cool is that? kool keith is the best in the rap game, bar none.

[Toshi]

So, since Kerry also supported the war, we can basically say that 25% of Americans put 2 and 2 together in lumping Saddam and Osama together.
kerry supported the war but very conditionally. that was his downfall, since americans are apparently too dense* to see anything in between supporting or being against something. what was so conditional about it? see his speeches before the gulf war and this latest iraq war about his reservations, about how force should be used as a last resort, about how this was supposed to be about finding and eliminating WMD.

(* i'm not trying to suggest that all americans who voted for bush did so because they bought the bush administration's line about kerry wrt waffling on iraq. there are people who voted for bush for their own, valid reasons. the people who voted against kerry because they swallowed the campaign ads hook, line and sinker are those who i am calling dense.)

he did NOT support the war for the reasons that the neocons do, and he had no part in the spin game (as pointed out so well by the daily show) that bush's administration played in order to insert the notion that saddam <==> al qaeda into the feeble collective american mind.

why feeble? let me refer you to that boston.com link again...

[BurlyShirley]

kerry supported the war but very conditionally.


So, since Kerry also supported the war, we can basically say that 25% of Americans put 2 and 2 together in lumping Saddam and Osama together.

[Toshi]

So, since Kerry also supported the war, we can basically say that 25% of Americans put 2 and 2 together in lumping Saddam and Osama together.
i know you're not stupid. stop acting like it.

[BurlyShirley]

i know you're not stupid. stop acting like it.
You're missing my point. If half the bush voters thought Saddam and Osama were in it together, and Kerry got 49% of the votes, that basically means that 25% of Americans believe this.

[Toshi]

You're missing my point. If half the bush voters thought Saddam and Osama were in it together, and Kerry got 49% of the votes, that basically means that 25% of Americans believe this.
ok. so going back a bit, that means that half of the bush vote can be classified as clueless, and the other half is either bloodthirsty or is "weighing [the] positives and negatives [of] Bush making a profit and a few million Iraqi's gaining freedom vs. Saddam setting pretty and people still being fed to lions".

[BurlyShirley]

ok. so going back a bit, that means that half of the bush vote can be classified as clueless, and the other half is either bloodthirsty or is "weighing [the] positives and negatives [of] Bush making a profit and a few million Iraqi's gaining freedom vs. Saddam setting pretty and people still being fed to lions".
Who is "bloodthirsty"?

[Changleen]

Burly, If the American Public 'care' so damn much, why did they re-elect the person who caused all these problems in the first place? Or is the reality that a good percentage of them have no clue, and worse than that, have no desire to get a clue, about what goes on outside of their tiny little deep fried bubbles?

Dude, I lived in Sedona Arizona and San Francisco, and I can tell you about the huge, sickening, ignorant prejudice I experienced everyday in Arizona and the utterly different world where people actually drive hybrid cars that is San Francisco. I don't mean to lecture you on your own country (:)) but sometimes I think you forget about these people.

[Slugman]

I see you have completely missed the point of this thread.
Since the point of all your threads are to have everyone agree with you regardless of any proof (por or con), yes... I have.

[Lexx D]

but sometimes I think you forget about these people.
He can't forget about them he is one of them.

[-BB-]

Alot of you guys have this tendancy to bash the south for its attachment to christianity and its hatred of gays and whatnot, but seriously, there is no other place in the world Id rather break down on the side of the road.

As long as you have the same color skin, sexual preferences, and religion...
If not, watch out. :nuts:

[Changleen]

He can't forget about them he is one of them.I don't think Burly is on the level of the wilfully ignorant wastes of water and carbon that I met in AZ, but there is something wrong with his way of thinking if he can condone the superficial couch-caring of most of America as proof that Americans are basically decent whilst ignoring the fact that they knowingly (or willfully unknowingly) re-elected a terrorist.

[Silver]

It's the American way. You expect a country founded on genocide to step in?

(In America's defence, no one else ever steps in either...the human race is pretty crappy when matters of power and wealth come up...)

[ALEXIS_DH]

My point here is that the situation is supported because Americans care, not because Americans dont care.

Simple enough for you?


perfect point. US-ers CARE, and care about THEMSELVES just like anyone else, but in the pursuit of this self-caring they will nail whoever gets in the way, at whatever cost FOR OTHERS.

and adding insult to injury, the white house comes up with this argument about the good father-nation that goes around giving freedom and democracy to everyone instead of saying up front "yeah i raped you cuz i wanted to satisfy myself" insted of going around saying "i had to have non-consentual sex with you because i see that your lack of sex life was really making you unhappy, and there are studies that link abstinence with cancer so i did it in the best of your interest, so be grateful".

notice the fact that in your arguments and those of neo-cons, the point of view is regarding the benefits for "mankind" are never in argument and is always un-movable from the US side.

[Changleen]

perfect point. US-ers CARE, and care about THEMSELVES just like anyone else, but in the pursuit of this self-caring they will nail whoever gets in the way, at whatever cost FOR OTHERS.

and adding insult to injury, the white house comes up with this argument about the good father-nation that goes around giving freedom and democracy to everyone instead of saying up front "yeah i raped you cuz i wanted to satisfy myself" insted of going around saying "i had to have non-consentual sex with you because i see that your lack of sex life was really making you unhappy, and there are studies that link abstinence with cancer so i did it in the best of your interest, so be grateful".

notice the fact that in your arguments and those of neo-cons, the point of view is regarding the benefits for "mankind" are never in argument and is always un-movable from the US side.Brilliant post. I especially liked the rape annology.

[BuddhaRoadkill]

Alot of you guys have this tendancy to bash the south for its attachment to christianity and its hatred of gays and whatnot, but seriously, there is no other place in the world Id rather break down on the side of the road.

Of course .... your not gay and whatnot.