Society Held Captive

[OlderThanDirt]

PB Montgolfier wrote:

(OlderThanDirt @ 31 May 2003 - 19:53)
This may be a simplistic and pessimistic view of history. But, I think people as a whole (anywhere) are basically sheep looking for shepherds. Unfortunately, some shepherds turn out to be wolves leading their sheep to the slaughterhouse. And unfortunately, some sheep are willing to allow this as long as the trip to the slaughterhouse is a reasonably comfortable trip.

I think you´ll find that it´s the Shepherd that would take the sheep to the slaughterhouse.

The wolf is more likely to do what it wants there and then.

Nah. There are not only wolves in sheep's clothing, there are wolves in shepherd's clothing. B)

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by sara5564@1 June 2003 - 01:03
Well, coming from a mongrel country that has spent the best part of its history raping the natural resources of less powerful nations...

My conclusion is that whatever anyone does in the west to aid those elsewhere they will be looked upon as invaders...

back to the media thread I am afraid...but propaganda will win.....the west will be pilloried for its attempts at imposing its vision on others and having ulterior motives (can we be sure that powerful western corporations would not move in like vultures once the dust settles and the infrastructure is destroyed?)

One other point....the UN will NEVER get its act together for fear of upsetting its members...and Europe will NEVER agree with itself never mind with the US on foreign policy. So as enticing as it is to try and solve the worlds ills, ultimately...we will pretty much have to wait most of it out until either we are attacked directly or the dictator dies or the people revolt...an unhappy but inevitable situation....

I think im with Sarah.


Being a mongrel and all.......

[PB Montgolfier]

Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@1 June 2003 - 01:44

PB Montgolfier wrote:

(OlderThanDirt @ 31 May 2003 - 19:53)
This may be a simplistic and pessimistic view of history. But, I think people as a whole (anywhere) are basically sheep looking for shepherds. Unfortunately, some shepherds turn out to be wolves leading their sheep to the slaughterhouse. And unfortunately, some sheep are willing to allow this as long as the trip to the slaughterhouse is a reasonably comfortable trip.

I think you´ll find that it´s the Shepherd that would take the sheep to the slaughterhouse.

The wolf is more likely to do what it wants there and then.

Nah. There are not only wolves in sheep's clothing, there are wolves in shepherd's clothing. B)

It's one thing to twist an analogy, however you are just kicking the $h1t out of this one. Let it die in peace.

[hekterskelter]

I beleive that the best answer for us the united states is to leave the u.n. We don't need some third world countries telling us what to do it is an outdated concept anyways. As far as europe the way we helped majority of the countries with aid and they turned on us at the flip of a dime proves that we don't need them.

[angellynn26]

Originally posted by clintonesque@31 May 2003 - 20:22
Most people in North Korea do not think of their ruler as a god, they are too busy looking for their next meal.


If only one small corner of our world is denied it's basic freedoms & needs we all are worse off.

At what point do civilized peoples intervene?
At what point do we justify going to war?
Is war justified?

Sometimes war is necessary, but it is a failing on our part.

We live in dangerous times..still

I just have to ask you man, if this is how you feel... when will the rest of the world bring war to our gov't for denial of our basic freedoms? The U.S. offers nothing more than a false sense of freedom. Do you know we have the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness?

Life? Really? Well, allowing prisoner execution is a violation of that right, whether that person took a life themselves or not. The government's job is not to play God. It is an established fact that life in prison is cheaper to taxpayers than execution, so what purpose does it serve other than revenge? Should the government of a free society be allowed to carry out revenge, in the biblical sense of "an eye for an eye"? What about separation of church and state?

Liberty? Really? Media censorship of any kind is a denial of liberty... and that includes censorship from the gov't and the media itself! Afterall, it is the big, rich, executives of the networks that decide what is aired and what is not!

And Pursuit of Happiness? Really? Tell that to the millions of people living in poverty, on the streets, or starving right here in our own backyard and watch them spit in your face, or possibly put a cap in your arrogant ass.

Give people zero opportunity to overcome their beginnings, then sit around and bitch about having to pay taxes on welfare... sounds real humanitarian to me!

I would like to see some Americans around here start speaking up about the truly evil aspects of this government and stop letting their greed and American arrogance control their patriotism. In other words, when the country is financially sound, everybody's happy.... as soon as it starts to go to sh*t, everybody complains. Anything that this country does concerning other countries is all a matter of money. A country that bothers with everyone else's problems, but cannot handle it's own deserves scrutiny, not respect and undying patriotism.

[MagicNakor]

Wow. I'm going to find myself defending America. That's a..refreshing change?

Capital punishment I've always been in favour for. He relinquished his right to life when he took an innocent's (or innocents&#39. And yes, most often the people who receive a death sentence are male, just as there aren't many female serial killers. You won't get on death row for killing a single person, generally. Killing a single person, and their entire family, perhaps. An eye for an eye, in that example, would be executing not just the muderer, but his entire family as well. The punishment should fit the crime. Consider that "life" usually means 10-25 years in prison, perhaps less accounting for "good behaviour" and parole, I should be dead. Perhaps a "life" sentence of 25 years would work in some of the more poverty-stricken third-world countries, but certainly not in the US, where the average life expectancy is 76.9 years. Also consider that some of the more destitute commit crimes just so that they can go to prison (they get regular meals, a roof, a warm bed, regular exercise and medical care...doesn't sound too bad). Futhermore, most financial calculations typically do not take into account that much of the legal counseling for death row inmates is pro bono, which does not cost the taxpayer. Most executions world-wide are substantially cheaper than life imprisonment costs, and the capital punishment/life imprisonment finance statement doesn't factor in anything but the United States' usage. I would hazard the guess that most executions in less-developed countries require a single (or perhaps a pair) of bullets and a somewhat adequate gun, a length of rope, or a pile of stones. You can't get much cheaper than rocks.

You're connected to this (mostly) world-wide invention that'll allow you information from most any part of the world. If you want to see other countries' perspectives of the US, feel free. They've got newspapers. If you're content to watch FOX News and decry its bias, it becomes your own fault, as there isn't one media source in the world entire that is bias-free. As it is, the majority of Americans can't be bothered. One need only check the apathy ratings when the next election rolls around.

Certainly, if you can show me a country where there are no rich and no poor, and everyone is absolutely equal, I'll move there. The only thing that'd come close is the ideal Communistic country, which, oddly enough, hasn't appeared. Additionally, feel free to point out a country that has no domestic affairs of its own.

Anything any country does with any other country is eventually tied into finance. Either they help out a buddy because they've got some valuable resource, they help out one more neutral in the hopes of gaining a potential ally, or they help out a (perhaps unwilling) one that detests them, so that they can say "Look how decent and kind-hearted we are. These people hate us, but we're giving them peanut-butter sandwiches!" Good press equals a favourable light for those who may be more inclined to reciprocate financially.

[clintonesque]

Try living in some of these pathetic totalitarian/Autocratic governing countries
angellynn26, and I'm sure you will have a fresh new outlook on life.

Very easy to criticize something you have never been without.

Life, Liberty, & Justice.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by angellynn26+16 June 2003 - 16:00--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (angellynn26 @ 16 June 2003 - 16:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-clintonesque@31 May 2003 - 20:22
Most people in North Korea do not think of their ruler as a god, they are too busy looking for their next meal.


If only one small corner of our world is denied it&#39;s basic freedoms & needs we all are worse off.

At what point do civilized peoples intervene?
At what point do we justify going to war?
Is war justified?

Sometimes war is necessary, but it is a failing on our part.

We live in dangerous times..still

I just have to ask you man, if this is how you feel... when will the rest of the world bring war to our gov&#39;t for denial of our basic freedoms? The U.S. offers nothing more than a false sense of freedom. Do you know we have the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness?

Life? Really? Well, allowing prisoner execution is a violation of that right, whether that person took a life themselves or not. The government&#39;s job is not to play God. It is an established fact that life in prison is cheaper to taxpayers than execution, so what purpose does it serve other than revenge? Should the government of a free society be allowed to carry out revenge, in the biblical sense of "an eye for an eye"? What about separation of church and state?

Liberty? Really? Media censorship of any kind is a denial of liberty... and that includes censorship from the gov&#39;t and the media itself&#33; Afterall, it is the big, rich, executives of the networks that decide what is aired and what is not&#33;

And Pursuit of Happiness? Really? Tell that to the millions of people living in poverty, on the streets, or starving right here in our own backyard and watch them spit in your face, or possibly put a cap in your arrogant ass.

Give people zero opportunity to overcome their beginnings, then sit around and bitch about having to pay taxes on welfare... sounds real humanitarian to me&#33;

I would like to see some Americans around here start speaking up about the truly evil aspects of this government and stop letting their greed and American arrogance control their patriotism. In other words, when the country is financially sound, everybody&#39;s happy.... as soon as it starts to go to sh*t, everybody complains. Anything that this country does concerning other countries is all a matter of money. A country that bothers with everyone else&#39;s problems, but cannot handle it&#39;s own deserves scrutiny, not respect and undying patriotism. [/b][/quote]
You really don&#39;t have the slightest idea, do you?