| Welcome to Cloud x Aerith forums! We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| U.S. Elections | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 6 2006, 01:33 AM (1,204 Views) | |
| Sadhana | Nov 7 2006, 02:16 PM Post #16 |
![]()
capitalism is dead
|
I know, it's interesting right? I'm still trying to figure out why Exxon Mobile had the greatest earnings last year in the history of the stock market when gas is about $2.50 a gallon.
There's a difference between nationalism and loving your country. I love America, I honestly do. But I am not a nationalist, and would never consider that a compliment. Nationalism is the idea that your country is greater than the others, and I believe too greatly in a worldwide, united humanity to support nationalism.
Neither was Iraq, lawl.
The US was kind of busy with finding Osama Bin Laden before we went into Iraq, so we don't seem to have too much of a problem with shifting priorities.
Ah, yes. The one thing that I admittedly am unsure of. I definitely don't support the war, and I don't think that being more forceful like you're suggesting would make things any better either. Should we pull out? I don't know. While I'm savvy in the world of politics, I have less training in the field of military tactics. What I do know is that this war is horrible, and Bush should be held accountable for lying about it in order to invade. I want us to get out of there as soon as we possibly can, but it's impossible for me to tell when that is. |
![]() |
|
| Bremic | Nov 7 2006, 08:31 PM Post #17 |
|
Member
|
If you had read closely what I actually wrote, I am AGAINST "going Roman." I put that whole scenario (once again, if you read it) up because it would show what would happen in the aftermath of a nuclear attack on U.S. soil. It is not good at all, but once again, it is what would happen. Im also saying that the only way to prevent it is to destroy the Web of Terror, and dry up any assets the terrorists have.
Well I don’t know his exact words, but from what I heard he was just expressing his opinion.
United humanity? Correct me if im wrong, but you want everyone to be treated the same way, live equally? If thats the case, its been tried before, didn’t work. Go ask the Russians. "You get one, you get one, and you get one" works for grandfathers and their eight-year olds, not for governments and countries. And if you mean "world peace," I do not believe in such a thing. The only way that can be achieved is... well... go watch "V for Vendetta." Know however, that my views do not concern world peace. Simply a more secure America, a thing the Dems seem to have no ideas on.
Actually, Iraq is considered part of the Web of Terror. Im currently reading a book called "Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror." Iraq is named among five other nations that consist of the Web of Terror. That is, countries who participate in and sponsor terrorist activities. The countries are Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Libya. The book is written by Lt. General Thomas McInerny (USAF ret.), and Maj. General Paul Vallely (US Army ret.). I guess I kinda trust these guy's opinions.
The U.S. wasn’t fighting a war on two fronts then, either.
You want to get the military point of view? I strongly recommend buying Endgame. Keep in mind that they keep it to mostly a military standpoint, so you wont see any over-the-top Bush praising either. Im fairly impressed with it so far. |
![]() |
|
| Sadhana | Nov 7 2006, 08:45 PM Post #18 |
![]()
capitalism is dead
|
As much as I dislike Capitalism (although I consider it the best economic system we have as of now), I dislike Communism much more. Rest assured, I wasn't talking about that.
Ehh, I'm not really saying world peace either. I guess I meant that I think humanity shouldn't be as divided as it is, where if a genocide isn't happening in your country, people don't care. More compassion and less geosentiment.
Because history hasn't proven that fighting a war on two fronts is a really dumb idea.
I might consider it, but I already don't like the implications made by the title.
![]() What about us then? Didn't the American government support Hussein when he was releasing poison gas on the Kurds, poison gas that we sold to him? |
![]() |
|
| Miss Yukari | Nov 7 2006, 09:01 PM Post #19 |
|
Fabulously Lazy
|
Er, I did read what you said, Bremic. The above quote is what I was referring to.
That's why I quoted them, so you'd see what he actually said. Did you read my post? The only example of a preacher being jailed that I found was in Sweden, and according to the website I found, He allegedly described homosexuality as "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society." He described them as "perverts, whose sexual drive the Devil has used as his strongest weapon against God." In Canada, the preacher would actually be immune from conviction because he was referring to his religious beliefs.
I don't agree. So the only way to prevent any further violence towards the US is to commit violence towards others? That's the only way to solve things? There was no retaliation by the UK to the IRA after the Manchester bombing, and in 2005 the IRA announced they were ending their armed campaign and "would not engage in any other activities whatsoever". So there is hope that peace talks and ceasefires can be successful. |
![]() |
|
| Bremic | Nov 7 2006, 09:32 PM Post #20 |
|
Member
|
Well I guess I dont know what you are. A hippy? Roflcopter. Jk. Sorta.
Humanity will always be divided. Even if people are put under forced "unity" like in V, humans will still have their own opinions.
Heh, well, some people actually want to do something about it.
Whole different world, whole different President. There are scumbags in both parties, ill go alert the media. To Yukari:
You seem to forget that im talking about a situation in which millions of Americans have been killed, and with most of our major cities having gaping holes in them. No President in their right mind would sit still in a situation like that.
I didnt see that one . Only the one where the Bible was directly quoted. I see what you mean. Yeah, thats a bit extreme, and I dont agree with that. But still, things like this still seem kind of weak compared to seeing neo-nazis walk down your street doing the Nazi salute.
|
![]() |
|
| Sadhana | Nov 7 2006, 09:58 PM Post #21 |
![]()
capitalism is dead
|
I've been accused of such. ;) If you want to categorize my economic outlook, call me a capitalist. For now. Until someone theorizes a system that I approve of more.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some day you'll join us, and the world will live as one. In all seriousness, I didn't mean it like that. I just meant that people should be more compassionate towards one another because we're all humans, not allowing geosentiments to divide us.
Blueprint for the Victory in the War on Terror implies far too much that we should re-make the Middle East, something I strongly disapprove of. That was in reference to something you said. Take a look back at what I was quoting. I meant that we've supported terrorist activities if being in "the web of terror" is categorized in the way you mentioned. |
![]() |
|
| Bremic | Nov 7 2006, 10:10 PM Post #22 |
|
Member
|
Well its time to fix those mistakes, isnt it? |
![]() |
|
| Miss Yukari | Nov 7 2006, 11:43 PM Post #23 |
|
Fabulously Lazy
|
My opinion is still the same. Violence in answer to violence only causes yet more violence. But be realistic here. The likelihood of that situation ever happening is extremely low. There'd have to be next to no security measures, no informants whatsoever, a perfect set of plans with none of the participants making any mistakes whatsoever, no intervention by anyone, and no suspicion on the police's part, no surveillance, nothing. Not gonna happen, not after 9/11. Don't you think that if they had the means and it was possible, Al Qaeda would have done so on 9/11 instead of attacking the WTC, or if not then, then by now at least? After all, these devices are so small and inconspicuous and could easily be sneaked in. There's always going to be terrorism. Whether the president is a Republican or a Democrat, that won't change. Even if key terrorist leaders were killed, it still wouldn't stop it. Killing ALL terrorists is impossible, and even that wouldn't stop it, because there's always people. People whose beliefs could change, children being born, new people with their own set of ideals and beliefs. People who could grow up to form a new terrorist group. Destroying the 'web of terror', will not stop terrorism.
Imagine aaaaaall the people, living life in peaaaaace!
|
![]() |
|
| Bremic | Nov 8 2006, 12:43 AM Post #24 |
|
Member
|
Quite the opposite, im afraid. As I said, the borders can be sealed up much more than they already are. There are still immigrants sneaking in every day, and whos to say that some of these could not be terrorists?
Now that is exactly what they want you to believe. They are simply waiting until we become so complacent that we let our guard down.
"We may not be able to save the world, well at least we try." As you think that it is me whos playing their game, im afraid it is you. They've instilled so much fear in you that you have no will to fight. That fits in exactly with the word "terrorism." Accepting defeat is an option, yes. But not an ideal one. |
![]() |
|
| Raist | Nov 8 2006, 10:06 AM Post #25 |
![]()
The Bringer of the Black Funeral
|
Work and uni study has forced me to miss much of the debate since my last post. I'll jump in where I can. I agree, in part, with the sentiments of Sadhana and Yukari so far. Bremic Quite the opposite, im afraid. As I said, the borders can be sealed up much more than they already are. There are still immigrants sneaking in every day, and whos to say that some of these could not be terrorists? But how can immigrants be stopped from walking into any country completely? You'd virtually have to completely close off the nation and disallow ALL newcomers. Martial law might have to be put in place or at least drastically increased military action. Is there any country in the world that that reminds you of? North Korea comes to mind. This is a simple utilitarian question. Is the threat of terrorism from these incomers (which has never been proven with serious evidence to be particularly credible) worth shutting down the country and drastically lowering the freedom and sense of safety that are necessary to the high quality of life we enjoy? Further, the notion that some of these people might be carrying weapons of mass destruction and might be able to get them into the country is even smaller. Nuclear weapons, in particular, simply are not that easy to get your hands on. The processes required to generate the necessary materials are too closely guarded and occur in few places that have a high security focus. The more likely option would be a bomb surrounded by radioactive material. This is also incredibly unlikely but it does not have the potential to destroy a city as you are suggesting. Now, before you reply I know you are not suggesting that these increased security measures be introduced. You are suggesting that we simply 'take out' the terrorists. My point is that this both misses the point and by necessity - unless you literally take out the entire middle east - cannot be effective. The nature of resistance fighters is that they have no allegiances and cannot be easily identified. Simply taking control of a country won't stop terrorists activities or get rid of them. It increases their support against a 'rampant US' and creates new members of yet another destroyed city. Iraq is the example of this. Feelings of hate and anger towards Americans have increased since the invasion not decreased. Why do you continue to think this strategy will work? Every other similar situation in history I can think of has ended in the same fashion. When Russia was shelling Chechnya they weren't able to kill or debilitate those fighting. Completely outnumbered and outgeared the Chechnyans managed to, if not win the war, force Russia to give up on the campaign out of disillisionment. They had something to fight for whereas the Russians didn't. It is the same in this case. Iraqis have something to fight for at the moment. They won't quit until they get it. What do American or any other nation's soldiers have? Little to nothing. So many of the people in that campaign have expressed disillusionment. That is the problem with your piece of propoganda. It assumes they want to be there. The answer to this is actually asking why these terrorists are fighting so ardently against the west. Why are they so driven? They fear that they are losing their very way of life. Their religion, their culture and their societies are being decimated by continued Western capitalism and globalisation without regard for the consequences. Don't get me wrong. I would say I'm a cautious supporter of globalisation. I think it is the only process by which a global community is possible. But without regard for consequences it is a knee jerk and dangerous procedure. Take this example. Farming in Egypt was originally a widespread profession that was practiced with the intention of sustainability. A family would harvest crops and perhaps some livestock with the intention of feeding themselves and their family and little else. Egypt are next met by spreading Western corporations looking to expand industries and productivity. The farmers are no encouraged to start mass farming. Creating huge fields of densely laid crops and livestock for profit and not just sustainability. Naturally, this requires machinery, increased labour and chemicals for soils and to keep disease and insects away. This is money they don't readily have. But never fear, the world's major banks are only a step away to issue loans at massive interest for these people to continue their work. However, with such large financial pressures it is not possible that all can continue to keep their farms running. Eventually, perhaps by luck, a few farmers find they are generating the greatest harvest and making the largest returns. The other farmers are forced to sell their farms and machinery etc in order to pay back the loans. The successful farmers purchase these farms and increase their profit and wealth. Some of the disenfranchised people will by hired as labour, but not many due to the machinery that is more efficient. So, the rest are forced to find work to support their families elsewhere. They move to the cities, increasing urbanisation and things like disease, poor quality of water and violence start to increase. There is only so much work in these areas (usually for western corporations) and so many are left destitute, with families, on the streets. One organisation approaches to help. Terrorists. If they will help in regimes to fight back against the very Western 'campaign' that took their original livelihood away from them they will be able to support themselves and their families. What decision would you make in such a situation? Western activity - including some of the measures you have suggested - propogates terrorism. We need to consider these concerns that the Middle East has and begin to confron them. We may not be immediately successful and may be met with frustration, but the longer we continue to consider compromise the more likely the general public will move away from these organisations, hamstringing the very thing they require; Western hatred. Note that I am not suggesting that this will work. I only believe that it has a possibility and that it is a better idea than stubbornly continuing with a plan that has so utterly failed to this point. To continue against such obvious poor results is utterly stupid. It is the continued feelings of regret, fear and poor reasoning that the uneducated public harbour that stops us from doing any different. They've instilled so much fear in you that you have no will to fight. This isn't fear Bremic. You're saying such misrepresents us, our arguments and commits the straw man fallacy. I'm sorry to say it is poor reasoning. On the contrary taking the opposite path and considering talks and compromise with these nations is the option that carries the greatest strength through the greatest hardship in the same way that Jesus persecuted against the hardest of trials. Subjecting yourself to pain and torment for a future good is not a sign of fear. It is a sign of hope. |
![]() |
|
| Sadhana | Nov 8 2006, 11:46 AM Post #26 |
![]()
capitalism is dead
|
Just thought some people might like to know how this all went so far (these are all going by CNN)... The Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives, with 227 seats to 194 and a handful still undecided. Our new Speaker of the House and in-line for the Presidency after Dick Cheney is Democrat Nancy Pelosi from California, America's first female Speaker of the House in history. The Senate is at a gridlock right now, 49 seats for the Republicans and 49 seats for the Democrats with two states still undecided (counting Joe Lieberman as a Democrat, I believe). The two senate seats left are Montana and Virginia. In both states, Democrats hold a slim lead. In regards to governorship, there are now 28 Democrat governors and 20 Republican governors. Two are still undecided. |
![]() |
|
| Bremic | Nov 8 2006, 08:27 PM Post #27 |
|
Member
|
Sounds like the Antichrist and the New World Order...
Nearly half of the U.S./Mexico border is left unfenced, not to mention the entirely unprotected Canada border. Im not talking about shutting out all immigrants, only the illegal ones.
Would I completely seal up the borders in normal times? No. But the reality is these aren't normal times. Also, I dont need evidence, the possibilty of it is enough for me. Im really not wanting to take that risk. I also notice, by the way, that you are from Australia. If you aren't, just say so. But from what ive seen Australia isn't exactly the terrorist's target. If you actually lived in one of these American cities, you might think differently about it.
Because no one has come up with a better one. And from what I know about Radical Islam, they're not exactly into the whole peace thing. You know what piece of history reminds me of this situation? World War 2. Before Hitler made any huge moves, he went around making peace treaties with everyone, and promising to them he wouldn't attack them. Poland was first. The rest of the world thought "well, maybe if we just leave him alone, he won't come after us." Hitler kept systematically taking over every country in Europe. By the time people actually realized what was happening, Europe was already screwed. Thats the problem I see with your idea. Say we do step down. Say they dont. If we kept taking their attacks, we would eventually be worn down, easy victims to our enemies. And I can guarentee you that if that happens, the U.S. wont be the first and last target. |
![]() |
|
| goddess_in_pink07 | Nov 8 2006, 08:28 PM Post #28 |
|
Ambrosia
|
Well, the Michigan elects were last night, and the Republican candidate didn't win. *Sigh* This time, I actually was disappointed the Republican side didn't win governor. I mean, our current governor, got RE-ELECTED. She's been in office for 4 years, and what has she done? Lets see, people here who support her keep saying "OH, SHE'S BRINGING TEH JOBS TO MICHIGAN." Yeah, 4 years ago, we were ranked last in employement rate, and guess what? We still are. Where in the friggin hell are these jobs people said she brought? We can't possibly fall any lower on employment, so why not elect someone new? Heaven borbids.... <_< We don't dare try someone new, and see if we they can help our state. But, on the good side, the Morning Dove is saved! YAY! No need to worry about teh witto birdies gettin' shot by hunts. LOL, funny thing, they wanted to shoot the Morning doves for food. FOOD! Yeah, who in the right mind would shoot a Dove, for meat? You could probably get more meat off a mouse than a Dove. <_< |
![]() |
|
| Sadhana | Nov 8 2006, 09:42 PM Post #29 |
![]()
capitalism is dead
|
Yeah, when I was watching the elections last night from 7:00 PM to 1:00 AM, I noticed that your incumbent governor was reelected. Just a minor correction (and I mean minor), while Michigan had the highest unemployment rate four years ago, they are actually second to last now, just ahead of Mississippi. Well. Jennifer Grandholm is the governor of Michigan, no? I don't know much at all about the state government of Michigan, but I was under the impression that the poor economy was largely out of her control. The unemployment hasn't been able to recover from the failing of Detroit's Big Three auto industry-- Ford, General Motors, and DaimlerChrysler. On top of that, the jobs are being outsourced due to more federally legislated pro-globalization trade arrangements. As far as I knew, she was trying to save jobs by giving out loans to failing industries in attempt to prevent cutbacks. Bremic:
Yeah, that John Lennon was an evil one.
I know that this wasn't addressed to me, but I'll respond anyway. Hi, I live about twenty minutes away from Manhattan. If anything were to seriously happen to it, oh believe me, I would feel the effects. We felt them enough on 9/11, the details of which I went about in the fourth post of this topic. Here's an excerpt from that monster of a post about my personal experience on September 11: This is the point I want to make... I know what it's like to have been hurt by September 11. I know the fear it aroused in all of us. I was scared to death living in a post-9/11 world, only a 20 mile radius away from a city that I love but is the biggest American target for terrorists. I know these things as I've tried to illustrate through what I personally went through on that day five years ago (no, that's sooo not a reference to FFVII ). But sometimes, people need to open their eyes.I understand the fear and the willingness to make compromises for at least the illusion of safety. I'm still with Raist on this one. I don't consider my civil liberties that dispensible, and I don't think that illegal immigration is a worthy focus right now.
That's kind of a bad comparison. Nazi Germany under Hitler was a united country, not a band of terrorists few and far between, scattered across the Middle East. The terrorists are not a world power like Nazi Germany was. And besides, they went down the appeasment route because everyone had just come out of WWI, and they didn't want to jump into another war so soon. They knew that Hitler broke the appeasment agreement, but they didn't move on it because no one wanted a war. And besides, the terrorists aren't "systematically taking over every country in Europe." Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. ------------------- Anyways, I'm just happy that the Democrats ended up getting the majority I begged God for. We are now going to have our first female Speaker of the House, and she already plans to move on increasing the minimum wage to $7.25 this upcoming January. I was pleasantly shocked this afternoon when I heard that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is at last resigning. Hallelujah. Although I already disapprove of Bush's choice to nominate ex-DCI Robert Gates, especially with the whole Iran-Contra Affair he was involved in. But at least that's one step in the right direction. |
![]() |
|
| Bremic | Nov 8 2006, 10:37 PM Post #30 |
|
Member
|
Yup. All his pothead hippy followers would have certainly brought a better future... ....I found this. Photoshoped, yes, but hilarious. A special message from John Lennon.
Yeah, I know where you live. Thats why it wasn't addressed to you.
Ok, seriously, whats with all this civil liberties stuff? When have I ever mentioned giving them up? And yes, cracking down on illegal immigration is a start on securing the country. I am pleased however that not long ago Bush signed an act to put up more fencing along the U.S./Mexico border.
The whole notion of simply waiting and hoping for the best is what im talking about. In my opinion, its a big mistake. Also, Radical Islam would love to conquer Europe, and they are already in position to do so if they wanted. Their manifest destiny is to create an Islamic superstate spaning from Atlantic to Pacific. Do keep in mind that I do not speak of all muslims, only the radicals whos stated goal is to destroy the west. |
![]() |
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Lifestream · Next Topic » |







. Only the one where the Bible was directly quoted. I see what you mean. Yeah, thats a bit extreme, and I dont agree with that. But still, things like this still seem kind of weak compared to seeing neo-nazis walk down your street doing the Nazi salute.
Imagine aaaaaall the people, living life in peaaaaace!


2:08 PM Jul 11