"Americans kill dozens of prisoners"

[uncertaindrumer]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

.

If you come back to my post youll see that I didnt say that especifically America was intolerant..btw...dont try to change my words here... (one person doing this is enough...two smell cowardice right?....lol)

I asked you what you thought our problem was and you said intolerance, didn't you? Or am I going insane...

Quote:

I dont want that America do anything...really...but its too strange that US only recently (your governement..not the people...right?) had noticed certain countries and consequently decided to spread 'democracy' ???

Well like I said...I don't agree with this war.

Quote:

Seriously, despite all your excellent knowledge in History -- what was your familiarity with Afghanistan before the invasion/war ???

Quite a bit actually. Unlike %99 of Americans, I knew who Osama Bin Laden was BEFORE 9/11...

Quote:

Kwait???? Of course not...it has oil...isnt it?

Most Middle Eastern countries do.

Quote:

Well we live in a society...you have to cohabit ...so you need some rights and rules to make them work...

But we created society. How do you know society isn't a problem to begin with?

Quote:

Its amazing the way you try to avoid answering my questions...I want that you say what are social rights? Simple question....

I can't list every social right I think we deserve. I think we all need to be able live as those created in the image of God should live. But that comes from my religious beliefs. If I had no religious beliefs, I probably would not be able to talk about what I "believe" about social problems.

[uncertaindrumer]

Quote:

Well as Ana said, the re-election of Dubya proved this statement wrong.

I disagree. I think the elecetion of Bush again came from a total lack of a countering candidate (Kerry? please.), and the thought that Bush would never be able to marshall support for another war, and the fact that Kerry supported this war to begin with too! So I think Bush getting elected again was not the result of people's happiness with the war but with a lack of a better candidate.

Quote:

I wouldn't say that the USA is intolerant, but I surely would not say that it is too tolerant.

Well if one believes, abortion, contraception, engaging in homosexuality etc. etc. are wrong, certainly one could think that the U.S.A. is too tolerant? The world for that matter.

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

I asked you what you thought our problem was and you said intolerance, didn't you? Or am I going insane

...

You are probably going insane.. (jk)...because when I wrote WE --I was clearly considering the human beings as a whole....I didnt say especifically 'Americans'...sorry if you didnt catch it...

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

Well like I said...I don't agree with this war.

Well...this is why I love you!!

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

Quite a bit actually. Unlike %99 of Americans, I knew who Osama Bin Laden was BEFORE 9/11...

So you are helping me to confirming my theory...americans know nothing about what is 'outside america'...

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

Most Middle Eastern countries do.

And most of the Western countries want it...

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

But we created society. How do you know society isn't a problem to begin with?

I dont know if its a problem..proabably is... .but we live in society...so we need to live using and respecting rules and having socual rights...

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

I can't list every social right I think we deserve. I think we all need to be able live as those created in the image of God should live. But that comes from my religious beliefs. If I had no religious beliefs, I probably would not be able to talk about what I "believe" about social problems.

You know that I dont have ' religious beliefs' ..hum..like you...right? but I still belive in social rights and Im sure Im able to talk about them...why not?

See ...you are being intolerant...

[uncertaindrumer]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

...

You are probably going insane.. (jk)...because when I wrote WE --I was clearly considering the human beings as a whole....I didnt say especifically 'Americans'...sorry if you didnt catch it...

Ah I see. Sorry for my misunderstanding.

Quote:

Well...this is why I love you!!

Only because of my political views? Doesn't this make you intolerant of those who don't have my views? lol jk

Quote:

So you are helping me to confirming my theory...americans know nothing about what is 'outside america'...

No no no, you don't geti it. Americans don't know anything PERIOD!!! Inn a poll conducted the other day, only 1 in a thousand people even knew what five rights the first ammendment to the Constitution gives them. tons of people thought one of the rights was the right to own a pet! The vast majority of americans, thanks to this pathetic excuse for a school system we have, are totally lacking in knowledge.

Quote:

And most of the Western countries want it...

Yeah. Well, one thing I DID agree with Bush on is that we are addicted to oil.

Quote:

I dont know if its a problem..proabably is... .but we live in society...so we need to live using and respecting rules and having socual rights...

If society is a problem shouldn't we fix it or get rid of it and make something new instead of just dealing with it?

Quote:

You know that I dont have ' religious beliefs' ..hum..like you...right? but I still belive in social rights and Im sure Im able to talk about them...why not?

Well you may have a few beliefs but where do they come from?

Quote:

See ...you are being intolerant...

I'm very tolerant of those in error. I know they are in error and won't compromise on that, but I do not persecute them for it.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

And yeah, Christianity DID initially spread through conversion. It ALWAYS spreads mthrough conversion. Some people TRY to force it on others but it has never and most likely will never work. You can't force someone to be a Christian.

I pretty much agreed with everything you said up until this comment. What of the colonial period, particularly in Africa?

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

WOW!!!!!! Now you will help me to put my point....America (West) simply doenst CARE about others people...countries.. social probelms ...dictaorships ...abuses...whatever...you just care NOW...because you were attacked in your 'happy way of life'...and now you noticed that Islamic world exists...

Its a very christian position btw...

no, that is most definitely not a Christian view. if that's the way you see Christianity, I am deeply sorry for whatever you have experienced that has made it such. Political Christianity, as used by Bush and crusaders, is not truly Christianity. I won't get into it too much in this forum, but loving one another is at the heart of the religion. So, it is very un-Christian to be secluded in your "happy way of life" and to not care if something doesn't directly affect you. Yes, that might be how states that are historically Christian might act, but the fact that the U.S. doesn't act unless acted upon doesn't stem from its Christian roots. Instead, our country was isolationist, really, up until the Cold War, so we have a good 200-300 years (including the colonial period) of not caring entirely too much what was going on in the Eastern Hemisphere.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by RalphyS)

There is no true religion, all religions are false and there are extremists or a better word maybe fundamentalists of all religions over the world, who prove it on a day to day basis..., but that's just my humble opinion on the matter.

i would hardly consider that humble lol

Quote: (Originally Posted by RalphyS)

The islam has been a religion, that depended on war to increase itself for a long time. But the Christian crusaders were maybe even more cruel and relentless, also Christianity has forced itself on the people of Africa and America with its missionaries, accompanied by soldiers, who forced natives to become Christian or be killed. Anyway I do believe Christianity has become more moderate and that Islam has a long way to go in that, but I don't think Christianity deserves any praise for that. The enlightenment and the increase in liberal-humanistic values and the separation of church and state and the freedom of expression, media and even the freedom to mock things c.q. institutions is what has made the west more moderate and less tolerant to the radical religious. In other words education about the atrocities made in the name of religion and the lies spread in the name of God has made the West less susceptible to being lied to about things happening in the name of God. This lesson still needs to be learned in most islam nations. And the most frightening thing to the radical islam is that the learning of lesson in the end will be inevitable, this is why they strike out so hard against anything that will open doors to do so.

ditto

Quote: (Originally Posted by RalphyS)

The American dream used to be what many in the world aspired, but as the saying goes: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. As long as the USA had a counterpart in the communist East, there seemed to be a worldwide system of checks and balances, ofcourse everyone in the free world, was on the side of the USA at that time. But as the iron curtain fell and the USA became the only superpower, its tendencies also became more dictatorial instead of based on cooperation. Statements like 'you are either for us or against us' leave no room for a third opinion. It is no longer allowed to disagree without being treated as an enemy. Laws are being fascillitated to invade friendly countries.

that's why i don't like Bush so much anymore. this approach that he and his cronies use is dangerous in international politics. much like radical islamists will experience backlash for their views, i expect that, if it hasn't happened already (int'l opposition to the war in iraq), the u.s. will again have substantial difficulty in currying int'l favor.

Quote: (Originally Posted by RalphyS)

I both fear islam, because it is an unenlightened absolute religion, and the state to which conservatism has led the USA, I hope in both cases education is the answer and that in the end reason will prevail.

I assume that, in regards to the U.S., you don't mean true conservatism. Conservatism, at least over here, indicates a desire for a smaller federal government, states' rights, and little government invasion of privacy. In this regard, Bush is certainly not politically conservative, only socially conservative (neo-conservative, as you may well know).

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

Our problem is intolerance, Ana? That is an absurd idea. It is ridiculous to even mention it. If one complains about intolerant people, one is being intolerant of intolerant people. Basically what those who claim we are intolerant want us to say is that everyone can have an opinion, EXCEPT the opinion that others are wrong. That is a ludicrous position, one brought on by the moral realtivistic and ethically bankrupt society of today. It also reeks of pantheism, which is extremely hard to defend.

yesssssssssss! i love it! i can't stand it when i hear or see people of a more liberal moral persuasion deride me for being "intolerant," and, in the same breath, tell me that my beliefs are essentially wrong. helloooooo, irony! at least because i'm an absolutist, i can tell you you're wrong, and not have to worry about making statements that are antithetical to my beliefs lol.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

Oh... Bush still has all this time? ...I think its enough time to find some excuse (evidences...) to start another war...but maybe you are right...

you're kidding me, right? Bush, Rummy, and Cheney might not be the brightest fellows, but I think they would realize that starting another war in which treaties and alliances are the reason for starting it (Taiwan, Israel, S. Korea) would probably kill the Republican party. In fact, as we're seeing inthe latest domestic issues--wire-tapping and UAE-owned ports--many Congressional Republicans are willing to disagree with Bush. The key here is that we have a fairly evenly-divided House and Senate, and Republican losses in heated districts and states in both '06 and '08 will obviously affect the future direction of the country. Plus, Congressmen who stand by Bush on such divisive (or even highly unpopular) issues seem to be headed back home next year.

[RMadd]

Ana & Stephen: I think you'uns (that is evidently an Ozark word indicating the plural "you") are at odds over the issue of intolerance simply because you're discussing different kinds of intolerance. Socially speaking, the majority of America is rather tolerant. Watching MTV or Bravo or HBO for a couple of hours will dispell any myths that we aren't. Yes, there are those, such as the KKK, who aren't particularly open to social change, but American culture, as a whole, allows for just about anything.
Politically speaking, however, President Bush at least conveys an image of intolerance. The Bush Doctrine--"you're either with us or you're against us"--is quite apparently intolerant of opposition. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the whole American political system is intolerant. It has adapted substantially over the years to changing social circumstance, so I don't see any reason why it will in the future. It just seems that some politicians, such as Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rummy, Bush, etc., are stuck in a Cold War mentality.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

I dont want that America does anything...really...but its too strange that US only recently (your governement..not the people...right?) had noticed certain countries and consequently decided to spread 'democracy' ???

this isn't exactly a new concept. all throughout the Cold War, the US used operatives in Latin America and Asia to bring about democratic change in certain countries, to "save" them from having a socialist or communist regime. we even supported corrupt bastards like Chiang (RoC/Taiwan) in an effort to prevent the spread of communism.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

Seriously, despite all your excellent knowledge in History -- what was your familiarity with Afghanistan before the invasion/war ???

Kwait???? Of course not...it has oil...isnt it?

ohhh, oil... evidently, that's our only motive for doing anything internationally. if we wanted oil, we would've gone in all by ourselves. if I'm not mistaken, the UN saw Saddam pulling some pretty illegal shit. Article 51 of the UN Charter says that one state has no right to abrogate the territorial sovereignty of another state. Iraq invaded another state in an effort to reclaim a former province. What if we (the world) just let that happen? Then you would see China immediately try to take back Taiwan (they did nothing with their UNSC vote on Iraq in the '90s, but chose to abstain instead). By not doing anything in Iraq in '91, the UN would have essentially rendered itself useless by not punishing a country who directly violated its charter.

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by RMadd)

no, that is most definitely not a Christian view. if that's the way you see Christianity, I am deeply sorry for whatever you have experienced that has made it such. Political Christianity, as used by Bush and crusaders, is not truly Christianity. I won't get into it too much in this forum, but loving one another is at the heart of the religion. So, it is very un-Christian to be secluded in your "happy way of life" and to not care if something doesn't directly affect you. Yes, that might be how states that are historically Christian might act, but the fact that the U.S. doesn't act unless acted upon doesn't stem from its Christian roots. Instead, our country was isolationist, really, up until the Cold War, so we have a good 200-300 years (including the colonial period) of not caring entirely too much what was going on in the Eastern Hemisphere.

Gezz... Ryan....lately you are misenderstanding all of my comments here...actually I was being ironic with uncertain about the christian view...

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by RMadd)

you're kidding me, right? Bush, Rummy, and Cheney might not be the brightest fellows, but I think they would realize that starting another war in which treaties and alliances are the reason for starting it (Taiwan, Israel, S. Korea) would probably kill the Republican party. In fact, as we're seeing inthe latest domestic issues--wire-tapping and UAE-owned ports--many Congressional Republicans are willing to disagree with Bush. The key here is that we have a fairly evenly-divided House and Senate, and Republican losses in heated districts and states in both '06 and '08 will obviously affect the future direction of the country. Plus, Congressmen who stand by Bush on such divisive (or even highly unpopular) issues seem to be headed back home next year.

One slight disagreement... I don't think the majority of Republicans oppose the wire tapping. They way they look at it is if someone is receiving calls from certain terrorist hotbed regions of Afghanistan... then the government has the right to know who it is you're talking to. I think the majority of the nation still sides with Republicans on issues... especially with the surge of liberalism within the Democratic Party... and with the antics of people like Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Joe Biden, Chucky Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi the Democrats are only hurting their chances. I honestly think the Republicans will wrap up the '08 election if John McCain runs... I don't think someone like Hillary Clinton stands a chance against him.

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by RMadd)

this isn't exactly a new concept. all throughout the Cold War, the US used operatives in Latin America and Asia to bring about democratic change in certain countries, to "save" them from having a socialist or communist regime. we even supported corrupt bastards like Chiang (RoC/Taiwan) in an effort to prevent the spread of communism.

... used operatives in Latin America tobring about democratic changes incertain countries??
oh its amazing! and of course ... very democratic!!!!! .... supporting dictatorships that killed thousand of innocent men and women in Latin America--some of them maybe had ' affinity'.for comunism system ---but most of them were common peole taken away by the militaires to suffer all kind of torture ...like teachers, journalists, students, priests...common people who simply disappeared...because someone decided that they needed to save those countries before they become communist...
Very democratic!!!!!!!!

Quote:

ohhh, oil... evidently, that's our only motive for doing anything internationally. if we wanted oil, we would've gone in all by ourselves. if I'm not mistaken, the UN saw Saddam pulling some pretty illegal shit. Article 51 of the UN Charter says that one state has no right to abrogate the territorial sovereignty of another state. Iraq invaded another state in an effort to reclaim a former province. What if we (the world) just let that happen? Then you would see China immediately try to take back Taiwan (they did nothing with their UNSC vote on Iraq in the '90s, but chose to abstain instead). By not doing anything in Iraq in '91, the UN would have essentially rendered itself useless by not punishing a country who directly violated its charter

.[/quote]

whats happening, Ryan? I remmeber you saying to Chase that Iraq was invaded becuase of oil...but anyway...youve must changed your mind...

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

Ah I see. Sorry for my misunderstanding.

Allright...I forgive you...
lol

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

Only because of my political views? Doesn't this make you intolerant of those who don't have my views? lol jk

Actually I must be very tolerant to say this... lol

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

No no no, you don't geti it. Americans don't know anything PERIOD!!! Inn a poll conducted the other day, only 1 in a thousand people even knew what five rights the first ammendment to the Constitution gives them. tons of people thought one of the rights was the right to own a pet! The vast majority of americans, thanks to this pathetic excuse for a school system we have, are totally lacking in knowledge.

That 'one' was you???? --lol

Actually I think that education is in a bad moment in everywhere ... especially public education ...because our (in a whole concept not only american--please!) wise politicians are much more interested in economics and consequently forget education...

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer )

Yeah. Well, one thing I DID agree with Bush on is that we are addicted to oil.

Well.. seems he knows what hes talking about ...he sent soldiers to invade Iraq...right?

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer )

If society is a problem shouldn't we fix it or get rid of it and make something new instead of just dealing with it?

Suggestions???

Quote:

Well you may have a few beliefs but where do they come from?

Have you ever heard about FAMILY?????

Quote: (Originally Posted by uncertaindrumer)

I'm very tolerant of those in error. I know they are in error and won't compromise on that, but I do not persecute them for it

.

Oh you are a very tolerant person....