The Thin End of the Wedge

[Sonthert]

I would like to propose the following:

A. Facism is a failure of democratic processes.
1. The same thing happened to form Nazi Germany. People became broke, unemployed, ambivalent to voting and they started listening to hardline, facist voices...the Nazi party.

B. The US is following the same road...our democracy is failing...somewhat slowly.

C. There are groups/companies within the US whom are benefitting from the failure of our industries, our falling wages, our increase in costs of living.

D. Those same parties have wrested control and regulation of key areas of our government...not as a conspiracy, but in the form of "The other titans are doing it, I have to, to survive."

E. Those parties might be aware that our democracy is failing or not, but don't care that outcome might happen, as long as they make money.
1. Everyone knows despots don't kill the rich guys, they shake hands and collect a check.


Comment, please.

[Macho555]

What can I say? You're right. The world is slowly dissolving within itself, to the point that the ones that already saw the signs will already be on top. Should it be that way? I don't know. As far as I can tell, its been that way since the dawn of man. The smart, devious ones will stay on top as they realized where on the hill to stand. Lord knows I'm not an overly intelligent person, nor an incredibly philosophical person, but I do beleive that's the way it will always be, until finally the ball we stand upon is devoured by the star that lights us.

[Sonthert]

I was referring to the US, specifically. I remeber being younger and things "changed", the way people heard things, thought about their government...it corresponded, I found out, around 1980, from a related documentary. I think the inroads were laid earlier...Nixon began to form the first unconstitutional governmental bodies, ones that violated the separation of powers...then Reagan started using doctored "Think Tank" information to make things seem right...no accountability, no election, no oversight, but those are the same think tanks, more or less that promised Iraq had WMDs...they'll say whatever has a paycheck at the end of the rainbow. No WMDs and who can we blame? Them? Who are they? They just switch staffs with another think tank and things get screwed up again next week.

[Macho555]

Oh I beleive I see what you're saying now. I'm sorry, I have the tendency to be a cynic in a global light <_> comes from...well I don't know what it comes from, lmao.

Well yes, you're still absolutly right. Probably through some masochistic tendency on our publics part, we like to let people do things that are against our own rules. I don't honestly beleive anybody thought Saddam has WMDS. At least not after the first search. I'm going to assume you mean our sudden change to hate people that we don't even know exist? Earlier in history, we HAD TO KNOW, everybody that was involved in our daily changes. Now we just need to know that somebody said its okay, until we don't like it anymore. It's a type of aloofness, and they direct it from their thrones the whole time.

I'll be honest, wether thats your point I don't know. But this seems like an excellant time for me to rant about the government situation in general with my own views. <_> Sorra.

[[LB]]

tang thats a little pessimistic. were going down the wrong road yes, but with the democrats taking back the senate AND the house change is just around the corner. As atrocious and just simply tragic this war was( or is to be) i think it taught the americans a lasting lesson, lets say kind of a refresher. I dont think we got the point fully in Vietnam, now WE GET IT, and weve only become an older more mature nation from our experiences, that is along as we ACKNOWLEDGE our mistakes, and as long as we give that fucking dumb hick in office the boot, excuse my language, but i think we can all agree that our president is about as incompetent as a wind up doll. Nothing more than a puppet for the corrupt minds of dick Cheney and Rumsfeld, who use bush like a bloody lever to pry up their stock option values

[Sonthert]

But there's a new refresher, every year or two. Since Vietnam, the US has intervened or attacked in no less than 15 different times...nothing has changed. Goebbels said "The ability of the people to forget is enormous." People forget about all the wars there have been in the past thirty years. People forgot that Reagan was dead banged in the Iran Contra scandal...telling the Iranians to hold on to the US prisoners until Reagan's inauguration and they would get weapons and parts from the US by way of Israel...now we're worrying about the threat that Iran poses...maybe those F-16 tires will come back to shoot us. How did we forget? 'Oh, he's a great president, alot like Reagan.' What...he made a deal to hold US prisoners extra long to make himself look good? Did we forget? Sure we did...

I'm saying, [LB], its slow, we've had 25 years of it. There was a time when the LAW prevented shows like Fox News Network from airing. If you aired an opinion, you also have to give time to people who had the opposite opinion or offer a serious opposite opinion with your own reporters. Is it a coincedence that the talking head stations like MSNBC and Fox News, that employ no journalists, mind you, they are all commentators, have a republican, big-business bias? It has changed, as things will do, but when you hear several news stations repeating the same lie "The whole world wanted us to attack Iraq." and then you hear other people repeating the same BS, on the street, you have to ask "Huh?" What are these forces doing to our government? They repeated the same lie long enough and people are repeating it, like the truth. Did the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that deregulated radio stations have an effect? Coincedentally, nobody was able to own more than 5 radio stations, but under industry pressure, the FCC lifted that requirement. Clear Channel owns like 33% of the radio stations in the US...they have the power to silence people (and have) for opposing their ideas or what they stand for...what happened here?

[Krautle87]

Uggghh, I thought this was gonna be a golf thread.

[[LB]]

agreed on all counts tang, have you ever heard of the film outfoxxed? its pretty incredible how crafty and sinister fox news is. But what i really took away from the film was that fox news (and other media sources like it) never present facts, they merely push an opinion. Bill O'reiilyl and Sean Hannity present facts, tehy simply scream and intimidate and reinforce their opinions by making their enemies look dumb or irrational. They use patriotism as their foundation to make it look like anyone who does not agree with their opinion is a traitor.

[Krautle87]

They use patriotism as their foundation to make it look like anyone who does not agree with their opinion is a traitor.

I've honestly never believed that liberals and Dems were traitors, that they were honestly misguided and had noble intentions, but since San Fran forced military recruiters and ROTC out of their schools there is no arguing that the left coast libs ARE unpatriotic and anti-American. :?

By the by...Saddam DID had WMD. We found the old stockpiles which weren't in tip-top shape, but were in fact usable and unsafe. Besides, would we prefer that he had a full nuclear arsenal like Kimmie or Achmeninidouche? Take out the crazy dictators BEFORE they have the capability to nuke us.

[james]

there is no arguing that the left coast libs ARE unpatriotic and anti-American. :?

Questioning the patriotism of someone with a dissenting viewpoint is an extremely weak and hate filled attack. The only way to trump it is to question someone’s religious convictions.

By the by...Saddam DID had WMD. We found the old stockpiles which weren't in tip-top shape, but were in fact usable and unsafe. .

lol no. Old is the key word there. The cleaners under my kitchen sink were more dangerous than those. The only danger they could possible pose would be if you happened to drop one on your toe.

I'm very glad Saddam's gone. But our intentions in going in there straight sucked. Why aren't we in places like Darfur? At least a Saddam-run Iraq was a semi-functional country. Instead of actual action, we get ten minute television specials every six months that will be quickly forgotten amidst all of our political posturing and chest beating.

Bottom line is that there isn't any profit to be made from asset possession and nation building in places like Darfur, and we won't benefit down the road (economically or politically) from saving economically inept nations who really need us.

Even North Korea would be better worth our time. Starving population? Check. Massive military? Check. Insane leader? Check. Nuclear intentions? Double check. But no, we're busing refereeing a religious conflict in the middle east k thnx.

[Krautle87]

there is no arguing that the left coast libs ARE unpatriotic and anti-American. :?

Questioning the patriotism of someone with a dissenting viewpoint is an extremely weak and hate filled attack. The only way to trump it is to question someone’s religious convictions.

You cut the modifier of "Since they kicked out recruiters and ROTC" out of the sentance, thereby taking it completely out of context.

Like I said, I never did in fact believe that liberals are unpatriotic, but those who suppoerted kicking the military out of the San Fran schools are, in fact, anti-American, no doubt about it.

If someone says that Iraq has been poorly run and the best course of action is to leave, I may disagree, but I won't question their patriotism. If they say that American troops are imperialists and baby killers, than yes, it is appropriate to call a spade a spade. That kind of rhetoric is Anti-American.

[james]

My cutting that sentence in half does not take it out of context. You were questioning the patriotism of people who didn't approve of the military recruiting on school campuses. How is that out of context? I said that questioning someone’s patriotism is, in any case, is a weak argument. Especially in the last few years, when the labels "un-patriotic" and "un-American" have been tossed around like footballs.

I can't say that I love how military recruiters would come to my high school campus and bullshit students into joining, but they have a right to do it. I think recruiting methods right now are basically crap, though. Several of my friends were recruited by a charismatic recruiter who would get them drunk on the weekends, arrange for girls to come to his house and sleep with them, and tell them how amazing it was to be in the military. Not to mention the straight lies he told them about inexistent sign-up bonuses. Now one's dead (RIP Clint ) and another is suffering from PTSD. Yay. How fun. It's the military. It's a tour in Iraq. That moron made it sound like a two week desert vacation.

[Sonthert]

They use patriotism as their foundation to make it look like anyone who does not agree with their opinion is a traitor.

I've honestly never believed that liberals and Dems were traitors, that they were honestly misguided and had noble intentions, but since San Fran forced military recruiters and ROTC out of their schools there is no arguing that the left coast libs ARE unpatriotic and anti-American. :?

By the by...Saddam DID had WMD. We found the old stockpiles which weren't in tip-top shape, but were in fact usable and unsafe. Besides, would we prefer that he had a full nuclear arsenal like Kimmie or Achmeninidouche? Take out the crazy dictators BEFORE they have the capability to nuke us.

Edit: I reponded with lots of inflammatory stuff...I deleted most of it. Krautle...you will not continue making remarks like that. I happen to be a west-coast liberal democrat and resent your insinuation. Normally, I would feel free to bash it about with you, but the other admins want to minimize the flaming, even on the serious discussion area.

Oh, James, the problem with attacking North Korea is that bitch bites back. The US hasn't attacked a country that could adequately defend itself since Vietnam, every country has been more or less powerless, including Iraq. We've taken only to attacking countries that can't defend themselves. I'm not sure about the military capabilities of Iran, but that might be what's deterring us from attacking them.

[Krautle87]

They use patriotism as their foundation to make it look like anyone who does not agree with their opinion is a traitor.

I've honestly never believed that liberals and Dems were traitors, that they were honestly misguided and had noble intentions, but since San Fran forced military recruiters and ROTC out of their schools there is no arguing that the left coast libs ARE unpatriotic and anti-American. :?

By the by...Saddam DID had WMD. We found the old stockpiles which weren't in tip-top shape, but were in fact usable and unsafe. Besides, would we prefer that he had a full nuclear arsenal like Kimmie or Achmeninidouche? Take out the crazy dictators BEFORE they have the capability to nuke us.

Edit: I reponded with inflammatory stuff...I deleted most of it. Krautle...you will not continue making remarks like that. I happen to be a west-coast liberal democrat and resent your insinuation. Normally, I would feel free to bash it about with you, but the other admins want to minimize the flaming, even on the serious discussion area.

Kewl. That's why people are free to disagree. Like I said, I've got no problem with opposing viewpoints, but sometimes you have to call it like you see it. Can I ask you, Tangiers, do you support ending the ROTC program and banning military recruiters from schools? I'm not saying that any Democrat from California is unpatriotic, just the neo-commie "9/11 was an inside job!!!" moonbats who believe that the U.S. is, in fact, the bad guy here.

Since I think we're both sane rational people with opposing views, lets try to keep the tone of the discussion civil. Besides, I've been wanting to order some of your kickass tobacco, don't alienate a potential customer.

*offers handshake to Sonthert*

[Sonthert]

I don't see it the same way. Why don't you make the statement "There's no argument that black people are criminals"? There is an argument...you are associating the actions of individuals (committing crime) with a group of people with some superficial characteristic(being black)...its called prejudice. Just because you see a connection that nobody else does doesn't make you profound, its still just prejudice...one level above superstition. You can see it, but it doesn't make it so. In fact, its a well held device in psychology that "when you see a pattern in other people, its not the other people that cause you to see that pattern, its you projecting your views and biases on them." Perhaps you are the one who is unpatriotic, and that makes you see other unpatriotic people around you.

Your statement said that there was no argument that people who supported kicking military recruiters out of schools were unpatriotic and unamerican. Truth is, there have been untold thousands of blatant lies promulgated by recruiters on school campii. If I said "Join the army, and they'll give you a million dollars." You would be damn pissed and want them off of schools where they lie to the students that you are an administrator for. If thats unpatriotic or unamerican, chastising people who lie and cheat, no matter what their status in the military is, then patriotism has a severely perverse view...thats notthe country I'm a citizen of. In the US, we're honest, and those who aren't get their asses beat or arrested. If somebody other than the military pulled this shit, those people would be in jail. People who would believe allowing the military to lie to get people to join is patriotic has a seriously warped view of the US.

[Krautle87]

Your statement said that there was no argument that people who supported kicking military recruiters out of schools were unpatriotic and unamerican. Truth is, there have been untold thousands of blatant lies promulgated by recruiters on school campii. If I said "Join the army, and they'll give you a million dollars." You would be damn pissed and want them off of schools where they lie to the students that you are an administrator for. If thats unpatriotic or unamerican, chastising people who lie and cheat, no matter what their status in the military is, then patriotism has a severely perverse view...thats notthe country  I'm a citizen of. In the US, we're honest, and those who aren't get their asses beat or arrested. If somebody other than the military pulled this shit, those people would be in jail. People who would believe allowing the military to lie to get people to join is patriotic has a seriously warped view of the US.

Very good and valid points...I would suggest that a better solution to this problem would be to push for reform and improved standards in military recruiting, rather than closing the door to our armed forces during a time of war.

[SanguineSolitude]

i dont think military recruiters should be allowed in school except for things like career fairs. we dont allow other advertising brokers into the schools on a regular basis. the pyramid schemes and crazy get rich quick people who feed off of foolish people arent allowed in. so why should the army, which feeds off of disadvantaged youth who cant afford to not go into the army. id rather have my child get sucked into a crackpot pyramid scheme and lose his money than have him get sweet talked into the army and lose his life. Why cant the army be like everything else, those who want to be in it will go to it. no other job has ever actively tried to get me to apply. or handed me fliers in the mall, mailed me crap promising a free beanie and t-shirt if i just gave them a call, etc. i understand that a military is a neccessary thing, but i dont think that recruiting impressionable 15 year olds with stars and stripes propoganda is the solution.


why does the army have this "right" to recruit in schools?

and i can be pro america, that being believing what this country stands for (or used to stand for before bush took over), and still not want recruiters in school. i could say you are unamerican because you dont support childrens RIGHT to be FREE from recruiters. I would also say you are unamerican for blindly following a leader that is damaging hte country, and forgiving all the military(killers no matter how neccessary and nice they are) does in the name of liberty. It seems that our resources should be going towards preventing wars (by being actually diplomatic, not bush diplomatic) and not all towards waging them.

i dont think your unamerican and unpatriotic. only republicans throw those kind of accusations. battling for freedom while trying to limit peoples.... freedoms? hmm.

[Scalliwag]

Very good and valid points...I would suggest that a better solution to this problem would be to push for reform and improved standards in military recruiting, rather than closing the door to our armed forces during a time of war.

They are not shut out. They have recruiting offices I suggest they use them. If a kid wants to join the military and is competent enough to do so they will find them. I don't send my kids to school to get pitched sales opportunities. To me they could come on career day like the rest and compete. They should also be video taped and reviewed for accuracy.
Any recruiters found to be liars should be given dishonorable discharges.
If they cannot recruit with the truth then they better fix the problems with the truth.

[Krautle87]

It seems that our resources should be going towards preventing wars (by being actually diplomatic, not bush diplomatic) and not all towards waging them.

With the enemy we face today, that would be called appeasement. How do you negotiate with psycopaths who are so fanatical literally WANT to die for their cause? Do you think Hitler could have been negotiated with? While, at this stage, Islamfacists are not as much of a practical threat as Hitler was, their goals are still the same (world domination, elimination of the Jews.)

Anti-semitism is more rampant among the Palestinians and much of the Sunni population throughout the Middle East than it was with the Germans. The German people for the most part would not have supported the Holocaust if they knew the scope of the exterminations, most simply supported forced deportations and the like. Now the modern strain of Islamic based anti-semitism, that's five times worse. There is a widespread belief that the Jews should be wiped off the face of the earth, and Iran seeks the means to do it.

How will diplomacy help us there? We've already ruled out trying to negotiate with psycopaths, what about international pressure? The Russians and to a lesser extent the Chinese support the Iranians, so much for that idea. Unfortunately this is going to get alot worse before it gets better...don't fall for the old trap of appeasement.

[skiracerj1]

One key thing that this country has lost site of is something Jefferson, I believe, wrote based on one of john locke's books. That people have the right to determine there goverment and should they be displeased with their goverment should have the right to revolt. This is where I feel we have gone the most wrong, for we as a country now decide when other countries should revolt instead of them deciding it. No one argues that Saddam was an evil man, but it should have been up to the Iraqis to rise up and over throw him, not us, same goes for Vietnam and countless other conflicts we've been involved with. It is not our job to decide another peoples goverment, and because of this many of our doctorines of war are fundamentally unconstitutional by our standards. This is a huge hipocritic action on our part. Whats the cause of this problem of these hipocracies? Well it comes down to the fact that our form of government, a republic (NOT a democracy), is inherintly flawed it that it offers up several contradicitions in its philosophy. It claims the people should be in control and make decsions and yet doesnt offer them a way to do this, instead we elect representatives, but no representative ever truly represents the voice of its constiuents, first of all nowadays your lucky to have a candidate that wins by a margin 33% which means the moment hes elected at least 33% of the voting voice for that "representative" has been silenced. What would happen if instead of that representative being allowed 1 vote for or against a piece of legislation, he must place 2/3 of his vote the way he wants to and the other 1/3 goes the other way? I believe this would create a radical change in what laws and doctorines are adopted. So in essence our form of government is fataly flawed, so does this mean were doomed to fail? Well only time will tell, but looking at history it would seem to be inevitable. Government, and in a larger scope, civilization is like a man standing on the edge of a cliff where a set of wings, he looks down and sees the wreckage of many others who have tried before him, but he says well certainly I cant end up like them for I've added all the latest fiddly bits, and so he jumps and for a while he floats and says see its working, but what he doesnt realize is that he is still falling, and because he is so elated with his seeming success he doesnt realize the ground is nearing him until its too late. That story is a paraphrasing from a section of the book Ishmael, it deals with many of these topics and really makes you think, if you havent read it I suggest you should, if for no other purpose than to see a different view point of the world. I've tried to proofread this as best I can, but I suck at proof reading so please forgive all the spelling and grammatical errors

[Scalliwag]

so many of the problems we have in the world today are because we have been into too many other countries business. We interject ourselves into so many places that come back to bite us later. That problem has been with both republican and democratic administrations. The bush administration just took it to levels that were unprecedented.
Now pretty much any country could say that they have "intellegence" that says that another country even half way across the globe is an emminent threat and launch "pre-emptive strike" against them. Then if it turns out that their intelligence was "faulty" they can just keep giving new excuses every week.
China could easily make that claim against Taiwan, take them out and say "oh well, it was good enough for the U.S."

That is exactly what the bush administration did. And now it is costing us 6.5 billion per week to occupy a third world country. just brilliant.

[SanguineSolitude]

thats my point.. what scalli hinted at. lets see. maybe stop pissing countries off, get out of their countries, and try to make right what we did wrong. if you get in a fight with a friend, you have two choices. hate them forever, or try to make things right. it may not be easy but hey thats life. sorry if i would rather not assume all islamics are fascists and hate america. even if thats true. is the answer to kill them all or to try to get them to stop hating america? just some thoughts before you saddle up and sally forth to kill the "terrorists" those being people who are fighting to get the united states out of the middle east. hell if the middle east were occupying the us i might well be a terrorist here.

[Sonthert]

It seems that our resources should be going towards preventing wars (by being actually diplomatic, not bush diplomatic) and not all towards waging them.

With the enemy we face today, that would be called appeasement. How do you negotiate with psycopaths who are so fanatical literally WANT to die for their cause? Do you think Hitler could have been negotiated with? While, at this stage, Islamfacists are not as much of a practical threat as Hitler was, their goals are still the same (world domination, elimination of the Jews.)

You use lots of big terms that don't mean anything. You are committing the straw man fallacy. You say "Diplomacy isn't diplomacy, its appeasement and we can't do that." If you define diplomacy as appeasement, you don't understand either word. Diplomacy is a mutual exchange of ideas with the idea of negotiating some agreement. That is not appeasement....7th grade social studies should define the difference. That group of Americans that think we don't need to engage in diplomacy with the rest of the world are the ones who we can chisel on the headstone of planet Earth "These Idiots blew up the world because they were to proud or too ignorant to treat other people with respect."

Anti-semitism is more rampant among the Palestinians and much of the Sunni population throughout the Middle East than it was with the Germans. The German people for the most part would not have supported the Holocaust if they knew the scope of the exterminations, most simply supported forced deportations and the like. Now the modern strain of Islamic based anti-semitism, that's five times worse. There is a widespread belief that the Jews should be wiped off the face of the earth, and Iran seeks the means to do it.

You are making several assertions like they are facts. They are not. They are barely speculation if you don't have some objective or empirical evidence. Please cite your assertions or back them up with examples...otherwise they are just rambling. For instance, if I said, Neville Chamberlain could have avoided WWII if he had just sent Hitler a boquet of flowers...you are gonna say "Doesn't seem reasonable, where are you getting this?" Likewise, your blurby Fox News pontifications don't have any basis, just because one person who didn't take their Paxil started spouting off insane crap and some commentators repeated it doesn't make them facts. You like to make lots of points, like they are well known facts, have absolutely no evidenciary support for them and them when asked for clarification, you ignore it and move to the next point that has no information attached to it. Just because lots of people say it doesn't make it so. I've heard hundreds of people say "Pepsi is owned by the Mormons." more recently "Coke is owned by the Mormons." Both of them make absolutely no sense with an understanding of ownership and corporations. In a like sense, most of what you have been stating makes no logical sense. Its possible its true, but from a strictly intuitive standpoint, it doesn't wash with me. So what do you watch Fox News or MSNBC? You seem to blurb out things the same way their commentators do.

How will diplomacy help us there? We've already ruled out trying to negotiate with psycopaths, what about international pressure? The Russians and to a lesser extent the Chinese support the Iranians, so much for that idea. Unfortunately this is going to get alot worse before it gets better...don't fall for the old trap of appeasement.

You call them psychopaths. They aren't. Prove they all are and then we can continue, otherwise, your point is inflammatory and irrelevant. They are other people, same as us. Its the same lame song...'Watch those Japanese...they're short but wily. They have no regard fo human life.'(WWII) 'You have to watch those Vietnamese, they have no regard for human life the way we do.'(Vietnam). 'The Soviets don't have the same regard for life that we do...they are an empire of evil.' (Reagan...paraphrased) Now they are psychopaths, but they still have no regard for human life...if they had no regard for human life, they wouldn't be terrorists...they would be sitting on their ass watching TV and eating Fritos. They, on the other hand, don't make light of hundreds and thousands of people dead and ignore the casulties...they take their murder very seriously. We, on the other hand, seem not to care about the thousands of Iraqii that have died. So at best, we are no better than they are, either way, I don't see that you can so sanctimoniously declare them to psychopathic since that would make us at least as psychopathic. We attacked Iraq, although they had never threatened the US, they had never harmed a US citizen...then we attacked them. So next is Iran...and you declare them to be psychopaths...how many people have we killed with the US? Iran wants a nuclear weapon and I don't blame them...the US is out of control and doesn't respect human life. IF we did, we wouldn't have attacked Iraq.