"Freedom" thread or something

Then don't post drivel

akamaisondufromage wrote: Then don't post drivel

I will post whatever the I want that is within the guidelines of this website and don't need your approval. Not that your cliche one-liners have contributed anything to the discussion anyway.

Edited by The T - March 10 2012 at 20:48

The T wrote: JJLehto wrote: Yeah but most if not all internet debate is pointless for one reason or anotherThat's why it's hear! I don't talk like this IRL and it's my only way to let it out Besides how many different ways can you say the government sucks? Assuming Obama gets a second term: Wonder if there's any chance he'll ya know...do something, like legalizing gay marriage and marijuana, since he won't have to fear re election. Lose all hope good Brian. He will not get more radical towards those social issues at all. Remember, it's jot as if the politics game stops with him. Once he's gone, he still has to think about his party and playing down the center is the best way to get elected (not that the sorry GOP is any threat lately anyway).

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/10/rasmussen-tracking-poll-puts-romney-up-5-santorum-up-1-over-obama/


The analysis points out that Dems are already united behind their guy, while R's are still fighting, so theoretically the Rs will improve a bit on these numbers.  When Rs stop beating the sh*t out of each other, they are going to start engaging Obummer, and it will be a contest.  The media narrative that this thing is over already is BS. 

Romney vs Obama sounds a lot like Obama vs Romney...

horsewithteeth11 wrote: Another laughable attempt at journalistic smearing.

Finnforest wrote: Yeah, I know the Paulite position.  There's no difference between the two parties.  Except on just about every issue where the two parties would do different things.

 

Since we're talking about Republicans and Democrats (and their similarities or differences in 21st-century Presidencies), I'd like you all to have a look at and discuss this piece:

Bush 2.0: 100 Ways Barack Obama Is Just Like George W. Bush

Slartibartfast wrote: Epignosis wrote: Since we're talking about Republicans and Democrats (and their similarities or differences in 21st-century Presidencies), I'd like you all to have a look at and discuss this piece: Bush 2.0: 100 Ways Barack Obama Is Just Like George W. Bush It's amusing.  Many of us on the left said that he wasn't going to be the liberal savior he was being spun as.

Yet he retains your support? 

stonebeard wrote: akamaisondufromage wrote: I wonder how history would have looked upon the USA is they had sat and set an example watched from the sidelines.  Probably not so bad, given the white washing that western media would do anyway. Few people in America know there is compelling evidence that Roosevelt knew of the attack of Pearl Harbor, but allowed it to happen to rally support for intervening in Europe and the Pacific. Anyway, think WW2 had to be fought. The Japanese and the Germans were aggressive forces with cold, horrible ideologies, and they were committing atrocities left and right. Even if they overextended and would have at some point been forced to scale back, having powerful nations ignore sovereignty of multiple  countries and take back land and people should not be allowed, whenever possible. Shame the nature of war back then was still basically throwing guys in front of machines guns. Less tactical and more deadly.

Can you provide a source for this? It seems well documented that the US military had been able to crack some Japanese diplomatic code and received similar from British intelligence warning that an attack was imminent. However, this theory of a complicit FDR seems to stem entirely from a statement made by Chief of Staff General George Marshall: the United States desires that Japan commits the first overt act.
The US certainly knew that Japan was about to declare war but there is no evidence to suggest that they knew the target location for any attack. Given the sheer size of the Pacific Ocean, likely targets were many e.g. the Phillipines, Singapore, Dutch East Indies, Kra Peninsula, Borneo etc
I also believe that if the Pearl Harbour attack had never happened, the US would still have declared war on Japan: all the indicators were there to suggest an American public growing increasingly concerned by an ever increasingly powerful adversary.


Edited by ExittheLemming - March 11 2012 at 08:34

^The US apparently did know there would be an attack and was waiting for it to happen but didn't get the location right. The Japanese didn't, either. Most historians agree Pearl Harbor didn't accomplish anything for the Japanese Empire since most of the fleet they destroyed was old and none of the real important ships were touched. Also, they didn't really destroy infrastructure like runways to the degree that would've served them better. The lifes lost aside, Pear Harbor was only a minimal problem to the US but quite the perfect, waited-for excuse.