| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
StyLaZyn 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 22 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4079
|
 Posted: August 06 2007 at 10:07 |
 NaturalScience wrote:
meinmatrix wrote:
But one thing is sure, those generations that were born right after Second World War are now in their 60s and they need young people to take care of them. This builds huge challenges for the health care and social security system.
|
This is, in my mind, the biggest problem facing the United States. Our entitlement infrastructure is collapsing - Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was quoted as saying it's in a "death spiral".
|
Sorry to exhibit my ignorance, but what exactly is entitlement infrastructure?
|
|
|
 |
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 11:20 |
|
Basically Social Security and Medicare.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 11:21 |
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
^^^
Do you want to know how we can make there be less illegal immigrants? By making it so they can come here legally. Two weeks ago I stayed in Juarez for a mission trip and every Mexican that I talked to would love to come to america legally, but they cant, because Americans only want ritch white people in their country. The USA is NOT an english speaking country, we have no offitial language, infact German would have been the offitial language if we got one more vote back in the 1800's.
This is not the most immigrants we have ever had, it sounds like a lot but it is actually puny if you view it as a ratio, back when we first allowed immigration we had a 75% German population that only gave up thier culture because of WWI. The Mexicans still dont even make up 10% of our culture and they are assimilating fine, usually they become english speaking within a generation. |
Yes, then we can reduce murder by making killing illegal and stop the spread of AIDS by renaming the virus happy fun disease. The U.S. has no official language, but it is an English speaking country. If America only wants rich white people then why does our immigration consist almost all of non-white poor people. During the Great Wave our immigration was white, but almost completely poor.
Immigration currently accounts for (only counting legal) 11.1% (ass of 2000). The all time high percentage in American history is 14.8% in 1890. In response to this in 1890 severe restrictions were placed on immigration afterwards limiting immigration in terms of numbers, education, and nationality. When Cinco De Mayo has become a recognized holiday in some states, I don't know how you can assimilation has happened finee. |
OK but St.Patricks day is a reconised holiday.
Celebrated, not recognized.
All I see are people marching down the street carying another countries flags.
Ok, but that doesn't change it from being recognized in California, Arizona, and I belive New Mexico.
Your first comment dosen't make sence to me. I simply think we should make it easyer for people to get here, we need thier labor they need the cash, I see no problem here. There is a huge supply of mexicans willing to work for low wages and a huge demand for workers willing to work for low wages. I'm not a capitallist but even I can see how allowing them to come here to work makes sence. its not a hard consept.
I'm saying that legalizing something doesn't remove the problem. Illegal immigration is a net drain on the economy. The only ones who benefit from the cheap immigrant labor are corprate america. Meanwhile they undercut the wages and steal jobs from our lower class. Controling illegal immigration has nearly unanimous support among lower class blacks, despite them being hardcore democrats, they oppose because theyre the ones suffering from it.
Hey I was trying to argue from a point of view you would understand, the only way to help the proletariat (working class) is to force the borgoise (upper class) to work, there should never be such a thing as a corporation, immigration has nothing to do with it, borders are just a bunch of superimposed bullsh*t.
? I don't know what you mean. Reducing illegal immigration would help the lower class. This is why poor blacks and legal hispanics are so drastically against illegal immigration despite also being notorious democrats, because their neighborhoods and jobs are the ones that suffer from illegal immigration.
actually it is easyer for educated people to immigrate here legally, they are our formost priority, but they should have to wait in line like evryone else, after all we have plent of doctors and scientists, but not enough people willing to work for minimum wadge in dangourus jobs.
They do, hell listen to what Raff was saying about her own experiance.
I was only talking about the laws that make it easyer not about a particular example. |
|
You want to fix one of our problems? you would need to change the whole system. |
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 11:26 |
StyLaZyn wrote:
NaturalScience wrote:
meinmatrix wrote:
But one thing is sure, those generations that were born right after Second World War are now in their 60s and they need young people to take care of them. This builds huge challenges for the health care and social security system.
|
This is, in my mind, the biggest problem facing the United States. Our entitlement infrastructure is collapsing - Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was quoted as saying it's in a "death spiral".
|
Sorry to exhibit my ignorance, but what exactly is entitlement infrastructure? |
Immigration won't correct this though. First off, illegal immigrants are by and large not paying into the entitlement pool because they work off the books. Meanwhile, they are collecting the entitlements themselves because anytime a law is passed ( by overwhelming majorities of the people mind you) to prevent illegals from collecting such benefits, courts simply deem it unconstitutional.
Also, importing loads of uneducated poor workers will not solve the problem, be them legal or not. That's just bringing in more people our government will need to support.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
GoldenSpiral
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3839
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 18:49 |
|
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
|
|
|
Proletariat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 19:15 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
^^^
Do you want to know how we can make there be less illegal immigrants? By making it so they can come here legally. Two weeks ago I stayed in Juarez for a mission trip and every Mexican that I talked to would love to come to america legally, but they cant, because Americans only want ritch white people in their country. The USA is NOT an english speaking country, we have no offitial language, infact German would have been the offitial language if we got one more vote back in the 1800's.
This is not the most immigrants we have ever had, it sounds like a lot but it is actually puny if you view it as a ratio, back when we first allowed immigration we had a 75% German population that only gave up thier culture because of WWI. The Mexicans still dont even make up 10% of our culture and they are assimilating fine, usually they become english speaking within a generation. |
Yes, then we can reduce murder by making killing illegal and stop the spread of AIDS by renaming the virus happy fun disease. The U.S. has no official language, but it is an English speaking country. If America only wants rich white people then why does our immigration consist almost all of non-white poor people. During the Great Wave our immigration was white, but almost completely poor.
Immigration currently accounts for (only counting legal) 11.1% (ass of 2000). The all time high percentage in American history is 14.8% in 1890. In response to this in 1890 severe restrictions were placed on immigration afterwards limiting immigration in terms of numbers, education, and nationality. When Cinco De Mayo has become a recognized holiday in some states, I don't know how you can assimilation has happened finee. |
OK but St.Patricks day is a reconised holiday.
Celebrated, not recognized.
All I see are people marching down the street carying another countries flags.
Ok, but that doesn't change it from being recognized in California, Arizona, and I belive New Mexico.
So, being recognised makes it more of a threat some how? I dont understand.
Your first comment dosen't make sence to me. I simply think we should make it easyer for people to get here, we need thier labor they need the cash, I see no problem here. There is a huge supply of mexicans willing to work for low wages and a huge demand for workers willing to work for low wages. I'm not a capitallist but even I can see how allowing them to come here to work makes sence. its not a hard consept.
I'm saying that legalizing something doesn't remove the problem. Illegal immigration is a net drain on the economy. The only ones who benefit from the cheap immigrant labor are corprate america. Meanwhile they undercut the wages and steal jobs from our lower class. Controling illegal immigration has nearly unanimous support among lower class blacks, despite them being hardcore democrats, they oppose because theyre the ones suffering from it.
Hey I was trying to argue from a point of view you would understand, the only way to help the proletariat (working class) is to force the borgoise (upper class) to work, there should never be such a thing as a corporation, immigration has nothing to do with it, borders are just a bunch of superimposed bullsh*t.
? I don't know what you mean. Reducing illegal immigration would help the lower class. This is why poor blacks and legal hispanics are so drastically against illegal immigration despite also being notorious democrats, because their neighborhoods and jobs are the ones that suffer from illegal immigration.
They were poor before illegal immigration was a problem. I am thinking about the poor evrywhere and not just the ones between canada and mexico, they are ritch compared to the poor in other countries
actually it is easyer for educated people to immigrate here legally, they are our formost priority, but they should have to wait in line like evryone else, after all we have plent of doctors and scientists, but not enough people willing to work for minimum wadge in dangourus jobs.
They do, hell listen to what Raff was saying about her own experiance.
I was only talking about the laws that make it easyer not about a particular example. |
|
You want to fix one of our problems? you would need to change the whole system. |
|
If you would like to learn more about my political views PM me otherwise I am done discussing illegal immigration.
|
|
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
|
|
laplace
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 06 2005
Location: popupControl();
Status: Offline
Points: 7606
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 19:25 |
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
no-one should have the power to employ these sorts of weapons. assuming a normal grasp of empathy and the correct level of disdain for government, that seems sensible, right? but on places like digg, fark etc. you'll find people justifying anything with pure contrariness
|
|
markosherrera
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 01 2006
Location: World
Status: Offline
Points: 3252
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 21:30 |
|
Haaa haa I remember when I was new in the forum ,I was like a revolutionarian ,but now.......I see the panorama......more in the center
|
|
1800iareyay
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2492
|
Posted: August 06 2007 at 21:35 |
|
I can kind of see the justification for it's use in WWII (saved more lives in the end, so they say), but not for its use against civilian targets, which is what Hiroshima was. It also led to two countries nearly bankrupting themselves (one pretty much did) in history's biggest "Whose is bigger" contest. Now both countries have hundreds, even thousands of used warheads scattered about until the next arms race begins.
|
|
meinmatrix
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 18 2007
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 230
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 03:53 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Also, importing loads of uneducated poor workers will not solve the problem, be them legal or not. That's just bringing in more people our government will need to support. |
Well, here in Finland illegal construction workers are an issue. You can't call them immigrants because they come here for, let's say, couple of weeks and then they go back to their own country. They don't pay taxes. Who ever hires them gets dirt cheap labour force. But neither is our government supporting them in any way. If they get injured in an accident they are on their own. Real issue is long term jobs like nurse and doctor. For nurse you don't need to have a very high education. Even immigrant can be a nurse. And we have for example russian doctors. 
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 11:23 |
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
^^^
Do you want to know how we can make there be less illegal immigrants? By making it so they can come here legally. Two weeks ago I stayed in Juarez for a mission trip and every Mexican that I talked to would love to come to america legally, but they cant, because Americans only want ritch white people in their country. The USA is NOT an english speaking country, we have no offitial language, infact German would have been the offitial language if we got one more vote back in the 1800's.
This is not the most immigrants we have ever had, it sounds like a lot but it is actually puny if you view it as a ratio, back when we first allowed immigration we had a 75% German population that only gave up thier culture because of WWI. The Mexicans still dont even make up 10% of our culture and they are assimilating fine, usually they become english speaking within a generation. |
Yes, then we can reduce murder by making killing illegal and stop the spread of AIDS by renaming the virus happy fun disease. The U.S. has no official language, but it is an English speaking country. If America only wants rich white people then why does our immigration consist almost all of non-white poor people. During the Great Wave our immigration was white, but almost completely poor.
Immigration currently accounts for (only counting legal) 11.1% (ass of 2000). The all time high percentage in American history is 14.8% in 1890. In response to this in 1890 severe restrictions were placed on immigration afterwards limiting immigration in terms of numbers, education, and nationality. When Cinco De Mayo has become a recognized holiday in some states, I don't know how you can assimilation has happened finee. |
OK but St.Patricks day is a reconised holiday.
Celebrated, not recognized.
All I see are people marching down the street carying another countries flags.
Ok, but that doesn't change it from being recognized in California, Arizona, and I belive New Mexico.
So, being recognised makes it more of a threat some how? I dont understand.
Isn't it strange that the U.S. would recognize an obscure victory of the Mexican army at the Battle of Puebla. Why would the U.S. recognize another country's military victory and why would any citizen want to celebrate it. It shows the disconnect. It shows that we have people living here who don't think of themselves as Americans, who still identify themselves as Mexicans. It shows that the government not only fails to voice the need to assimilate, but that it supports the failure to do so.
Your first comment dosen't make sence to me. I simply think we should make it easyer for people to get here, we need thier labor they need the cash, I see no problem here. There is a huge supply of mexicans willing to work for low wages and a huge demand for workers willing to work for low wages. I'm not a capitallist but even I can see how allowing them to come here to work makes sence. its not a hard consept.
I'm saying that legalizing something doesn't remove the problem. Illegal immigration is a net drain on the economy. The only ones who benefit from the cheap immigrant labor are corprate america. Meanwhile they undercut the wages and steal jobs from our lower class. Controling illegal immigration has nearly unanimous support among lower class blacks, despite them being hardcore democrats, they oppose because theyre the ones suffering from it.
Hey I was trying to argue from a point of view you would understand, the only way to help the proletariat (working class) is to force the borgoise (upper class) to work, there should never be such a thing as a corporation, immigration has nothing to do with it, borders are just a bunch of superimposed bullsh*t.
? I don't know what you mean. Reducing illegal immigration would help the lower class. This is why poor blacks and legal hispanics are so drastically against illegal immigration despite also being notorious democrats, because their neighborhoods and jobs are the ones that suffer from illegal immigration.
They were poor before illegal immigration was a problem. I am thinking about the poor evrywhere and not just the ones between canada and mexico, they are ritch compared to the poor in other countries
The poor in other countries are of no concern to me. I'm worried about the poor in America. The government has a duty to do whats best for the American people, not for the global interest. These people deserve the wages that the market would provide for them if not for illegals undercutting the wage.
actually it is easyer for educated people to immigrate here legally, they are our formost priority, but they should have to wait in line like evryone else, after all we have plent of doctors and scientists, but not enough people willing to work for minimum wadge in dangourus jobs.
They do, hell listen to what Raff was saying about her own experiance.
I was only talking about the laws that make it easyer not about a particular example. |
|
You want to fix one of our problems? you would need to change the whole system. |
|
If you would like to learn more about my political views PM me otherwise I am done discussing illegal immigration. |
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 11:29 |
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
I support the decision to use them in terms of WWII. A ground invasion of Japan would have cost far more American lives than the entire Europe, Africa, and Pacific campaign had cost up until that point. We would have faced a similar type of warfare that we did in Vietnam and Iraq now, only against a more highly trained and better armed foe and with even less of an idea of how to conduct such a war. Truman saved hundreds of thousands of American lives when he ordered the bomb dropped. Japans reluctance to surrender after Little Boy hit Hiroshima shows how prolonged a ground invasion would have been.
Edited by Equality 7-2521 - August 07 2007 at 11:32
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
GoldenSpiral
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3839
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:36 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
I support the decision to use them in terms of WWII. A ground invasion of Japan would have cost far more American lives than the entire Europe, Africa, and Pacific campaign had cost up until that point. We would have faced a similar type of warfare that we did in Vietnam and Iraq now, only against a more highly trained and better armed foe and with even less of an idea of how to conduct such a war. Truman saved hundreds of thousands of American lives when he ordered the bomb dropped. Japans reluctance to surrender after Little Boy hit Hiroshima shows how prolonged a ground invasion would have been. |
The dropping of the bomb was rushed, though.
The Soviets, having been focused on Hitler, were just weeks away from declaring official war on Japan and working together with the US. Certainly a two-fronted war against both the US and Russia could not be sustained long.
But, if the Soviets entered the war, they would share influence in Japan's reconstruction after surrender. So, instead of sharing victory with Communists, the US decided to just kill civilians and plunge the world into decades of atomic fear.
You know a weapon is bad when the very people who built it tell you not to use it. 
|
|
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:38 |
|
Who wouldn't trade thousands of American lives in a ground invasion of Japan for no nuclear weapons? Of course, they probably would have been discovered anyway. Science, is clearly not always the savior of mankind.
|
|
|
|
StyLaZyn
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 22 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4079
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:49 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
I support the decision to use them in terms of WWII. A ground invasion of Japan would have cost far more American lives than the entire Europe, Africa, and Pacific campaign had cost up until that point. We would have faced a similar type of warfare that we did in Vietnam and Iraq now, only against a more highly trained and better armed foe and with even less of an idea of how to conduct such a war. Truman saved hundreds of thousands of American lives when he ordered the bomb dropped. Japans reluctance to surrender after Little Boy hit Hiroshima shows how prolonged a ground invasion would have been. |
George and Dickie want you on their staff.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:50 |
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
I support the decision to use them in terms of WWII. A ground invasion of Japan would have cost far more American lives than the entire Europe, Africa, and Pacific campaign had cost up until that point. We would have faced a similar type of warfare that we did in Vietnam and Iraq now, only against a more highly trained and better armed foe and with even less of an idea of how to conduct such a war. Truman saved hundreds of thousands of American lives when he ordered the bomb dropped. Japans reluctance to surrender after Little Boy hit Hiroshima shows how prolonged a ground invasion would have been. |
The dropping of the bomb was rushed, though.
The Soviets, having been focused on Hitler, were just weeks away from declaring official war on Japan and working together with the US. Certainly a two-fronted war against both the US and Russia could not be sustained long.
But, if the Soviets entered the war, they would share influence in Japan's reconstruction after surrender. So, instead of sharing victory with Communists, the US decided to just kill civilians and plunge the world into decades of atomic fear.
You know a weapon is bad when the very people who built it tell you not to use it. |
Everything was just peachy keen in Germany with the U.S. and Soviets sharing the victory there. The Japanese brought it upon themselves. They instituted a policy of total war where every woman and child was to fight against the U.S. invaders to the death. Can you really say there's a such thing as civilian casualties in a state of total war. They were made combatants and they were dealt with like combatants and the only reason many of us are alive today is because we saved half a million of our great-grandfathers doing it.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:51 |
StyLaZyn wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
GoldenSpiral wrote:
Well, if anyone wants to explore an unrelated tangent in this political thread, I'd like to discuss today's anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing.
Now I'm not passionate about a whole lot of political things, but I strongly believe that the use of atomic weapons is terrible and should never have been done.
I was reading a thread on the subject at Digg, and some of the replies were disgusting. People still believe that those many thousands of poor civilians deserved to die for the offenses of their government.
Anyone else have feelings on the subject?
|
I support the decision to use them in terms of WWII. A ground invasion of Japan would have cost far more American lives than the entire Europe, Africa, and Pacific campaign had cost up until that point. We would have faced a similar type of warfare that we did in Vietnam and Iraq now, only against a more highly trained and better armed foe and with even less of an idea of how to conduct such a war. Truman saved hundreds of thousands of American lives when he ordered the bomb dropped. Japans reluctance to surrender after Little Boy hit Hiroshima shows how prolonged a ground invasion would have been. |
George and Dickie want you on their staff.
|
Good. In a few weeks I'd have U.S. casualties in Iraq cut to nothing. I hope they call me for the job.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:53 |
stonebeard wrote:
Who wouldn't trade thousands of American lives in a ground invasion of Japan for no nuclear weapons? Of course, they probably would have been discovered anyway. Science, is clearly not always the savior of mankind. |
I wouldn't.
It's strange to me that Japan has accepted the bombing themselves, because they understood their total war concept and what it meant. Then we have the U.S. eaten up with guilt three generations later.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
StyLaZyn
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 22 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4079
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:54 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Good. In a few weeks I'd have U.S. casualties in Iraq cut to nothing. I hope they call me for the job. |
Really? And how do you propose that is accomplished? Bring them back home?
|
|
|
|
Proletariat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
|
Posted: August 07 2007 at 12:57 |
|
I think the reason that you cant understand me Equality with numbers is that you view yourself as an american, I dont I am a citizen of the world, my views are global.
|
|
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Political discussion thread
