Royd 0 #51 May 10, 2007 I just can't decide who was right. QuoteVietnam/Iraq Vietnam/Iraq I guess we don't know yet which will be the bigger debacle, and the bigger stain on the history of the US. Vietnam used to be the winner, but Iraq is slowly overtaking it.Number of American dead, wounded, money invested. What's your criteria? Or is it just the number of crybaby liberals who are hoping that we lose the war? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #52 May 10, 2007 > Or is it just the number of crybaby liberals who are hoping that we lose the war? Looks like you're going to have to add all the "crybaby conservatives" who "want us to lose the war" to your diatribes! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #53 May 10, 2007 QuoteI get the point you are trying to make, it's just a huge stretch. The "Jingoes" are brought together by an enemy. A dictator needs a certain group to blame the state of his own nation on, a group they can rise up and unite against. i.e. the Jews are exploiting our German workers, western europe has kept us down ever since WW1 and are embarrassing us with the peace treaty. Here are the two reasons that come to mind. 1. The U.S. president can use "terrorists" to blame, as an excuse for people to target their anger at, but for what. Germany was in a terrible way in the 1930s, during the great depression. They had lost the first world war and were deep in debt in retribution payment. The U.S. economy is doing pretty good, even the recession after 9/11 turned out to be minor. The U.S. ended up becoming the lone super power on the planet during the cold war. The situations in our countries are very different. We are not suffering. 2. The two political parties fighting for power in Germany were assasinating each other left and right, when the Nazi party was struggling for power. Both parties had paramilitary groups engaged in beating citizens while they were fighting for power. This is the situation Germany was in before the Nazi's even got into office. If Democrats and Republicans start assasinating each other all over the place, then I'll worry about a slippery slope. If either party starts beating on independant citizens like myself, then I'll worry about a slippery slope. Hitler began his rise to power by blaming the labor unions for the nation's economic woes(blaming and killing Jews came only after the patriots entrenched his power. Politically led blood purges start small and gain momentum as patriots clamor to come on board.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Royd 0 #54 May 10, 2007 Same can be said of any administration this country has endured. Big difference is that under Hitler, if you didn't agree you didn't exist for long. I honestly don't think anyone has to fear that here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote I guess we will revisit this AFTER martial law is declared... THEN I think some other groups of Americans will be in the same boat as many American muslims have been for the last 5 years. Do you mean the one's who never protest the violence propagated within their religion? Yea, they seem to have just disappeared. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites joedirt 0 #55 May 10, 2007 So which point do we disagree on. 1. Americans are not suffering like the Germans were. or 2. Democrats and Republicans are not killing each other and beating people in the streets fighting for power. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites 434 2 #56 May 10, 2007 They are not killing each other, but let the media bring the scandals on the opponent instead! And you know about the energy crises that will come in the near future. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #57 May 10, 2007 QuoteSo which point do we disagree on. 1. Americans are not suffering like the Germans were. or 2. Democrats and Republicans are not killing each other and beating people in the streets fighting for power. I have no issue with either of your points ...they just aren't related to mine. My comments were concerning ...how such things can start. They start somewhere. With the possible exception of military coups, they don't spring, full blown, into the historical atrocities I referred to. They start by otherwise good people reacting instinctually to a problem (real or perceived) without the inclination or ability to look down the road and see the consequences. Regarding the US, I am most concerned with the progressively functional dissolution of the Bill of Rights and wonder if the knuckle draggers and club pounders will be able to look back and see what they contributed to. While I have opinions about our war in Iraq, I am far more concerned with what our government has done and is doing at home.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #58 May 10, 2007 Quote> Or is it just the number of crybaby liberals who are hoping that we lose the war? Looks like you're going to have to add all the "crybaby conservatives" who "want us to lose the war" to your diatribes! Yup...damn John McCain and his "We've lost the war in Iraq" comments!!! ... oh, wait...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #59 May 11, 2007 >Yup...damn John McCain and his "We've lost the war in Iraq" comments!!! John McCain: --------------------------- There is no reason for the United States of America to remain in Iraq. The American people want them home, I believe the majority of Congress wants them home, and to set an artificial date of March 31 or even February 1, in my view, is not acceptable. The criteria should be to bring them home as rapidly and safely as possible, an evolution which I think could be completed in a matter of weeks. Our continued military presence in Iraq allows another situation to arise which could then lead to the wounding, killing or capture of American fighting men and women. We should do all in our power to avoid that. . . . Certain dates, Mr. President, are not the criteria here. What is the criteria and what should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal from Iraq. And if we do not do that and other Americans die, other Americans are wounded, other Americans are captured because we stay too long--longer than necessary--then I would say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress of the United States who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution of the United States and mandate that they be brought home quickly and safely as possible. . . . I know that this debate is going to go on this afternoon and I have a lot more to say, but the argument that somehow the United States would suffer a loss to our prestige and our viability, as far as the No. 1 superpower in the world, I think is baloney. The fact is, we won the cold war. The fact is, we won the Persian Gulf conflict. And the fact is that the United States is still the only major world superpower. I can tell you what will erode our prestige. I can tell you what will hurt our viability as the world's superpower, and that is if we enmesh ourselves in a drawn-out situation which entails the loss of American lives, more debacles. . . We suffered a terrible tragedy in Beirut, Mr. President; 240 young marines lost their lives, but we got out. Now is the time for us to get out of Iraq as rapidly and as promptly and as safely as possible. I, along with many others, will have an amendment that says exactly that. It does not give any date certain. It does not say anything about any other missions that the United States may need or feels it needs to carry out. It will say that we should get out as rapidly and orderly as possible. ---------------------------------- oops, sorry, that was about Somalia, not Iraq. My mistake! Funny how a "let-the-terrorists-win defeatocrat" becomes a hawk when the president is the right party. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites joedirt 0 #60 May 11, 2007 I have no issue with either of your points ...they just aren't related to mine. *** If you beleive these reasons aren't relevent as to how the German people let Hitler get into power... then we have very different "perspectives on history". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marcandalysse 0 #61 May 11, 2007 QuoteI say this as a historian....Studying the past to predict the future is a complete red herring in my opinion If you think that, why be a 'historian'? Just for your curiosity's sake? "He who forgets the past is condemned to repeat it" George Santayana "The reason angels can fly is that they take themselves so lightly." --GK Chesterton Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #62 May 11, 2007 QuoteI have no issue with either of your points ...they just aren't related to mine. *** If you beleive these reasons aren't relevent as to how the German people let Hitler get into power... then we have very different "perspectives on history". It's possible weather patterns influencing crop production were also relevent...it's just not a tangent I care to take. Feel free to start your own 'Why It Can't Happen Here' thread.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DZJ 0 #63 May 12, 2007 QuoteQuoteI say this as a historian....Studying the past to predict the future is a complete red herring in my opinion If you think that, why be a 'historian'? Just for your curiosity's sake?I study history because it fascinates me in its own right, and because a proper understanding of the present requires a decent understanding of the past. To try and project that forwards, however, is usually folly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 3,119 #52 May 10, 2007 > Or is it just the number of crybaby liberals who are hoping that we lose the war? Looks like you're going to have to add all the "crybaby conservatives" who "want us to lose the war" to your diatribes! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #53 May 10, 2007 QuoteI get the point you are trying to make, it's just a huge stretch. The "Jingoes" are brought together by an enemy. A dictator needs a certain group to blame the state of his own nation on, a group they can rise up and unite against. i.e. the Jews are exploiting our German workers, western europe has kept us down ever since WW1 and are embarrassing us with the peace treaty. Here are the two reasons that come to mind. 1. The U.S. president can use "terrorists" to blame, as an excuse for people to target their anger at, but for what. Germany was in a terrible way in the 1930s, during the great depression. They had lost the first world war and were deep in debt in retribution payment. The U.S. economy is doing pretty good, even the recession after 9/11 turned out to be minor. The U.S. ended up becoming the lone super power on the planet during the cold war. The situations in our countries are very different. We are not suffering. 2. The two political parties fighting for power in Germany were assasinating each other left and right, when the Nazi party was struggling for power. Both parties had paramilitary groups engaged in beating citizens while they were fighting for power. This is the situation Germany was in before the Nazi's even got into office. If Democrats and Republicans start assasinating each other all over the place, then I'll worry about a slippery slope. If either party starts beating on independant citizens like myself, then I'll worry about a slippery slope. Hitler began his rise to power by blaming the labor unions for the nation's economic woes(blaming and killing Jews came only after the patriots entrenched his power. Politically led blood purges start small and gain momentum as patriots clamor to come on board.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #54 May 10, 2007 Same can be said of any administration this country has endured. Big difference is that under Hitler, if you didn't agree you didn't exist for long. I honestly don't think anyone has to fear that here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote I guess we will revisit this AFTER martial law is declared... THEN I think some other groups of Americans will be in the same boat as many American muslims have been for the last 5 years. Do you mean the one's who never protest the violence propagated within their religion? Yea, they seem to have just disappeared. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joedirt 0 #55 May 10, 2007 So which point do we disagree on. 1. Americans are not suffering like the Germans were. or 2. Democrats and Republicans are not killing each other and beating people in the streets fighting for power. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
434 2 #56 May 10, 2007 They are not killing each other, but let the media bring the scandals on the opponent instead! And you know about the energy crises that will come in the near future. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #57 May 10, 2007 QuoteSo which point do we disagree on. 1. Americans are not suffering like the Germans were. or 2. Democrats and Republicans are not killing each other and beating people in the streets fighting for power. I have no issue with either of your points ...they just aren't related to mine. My comments were concerning ...how such things can start. They start somewhere. With the possible exception of military coups, they don't spring, full blown, into the historical atrocities I referred to. They start by otherwise good people reacting instinctually to a problem (real or perceived) without the inclination or ability to look down the road and see the consequences. Regarding the US, I am most concerned with the progressively functional dissolution of the Bill of Rights and wonder if the knuckle draggers and club pounders will be able to look back and see what they contributed to. While I have opinions about our war in Iraq, I am far more concerned with what our government has done and is doing at home.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #58 May 10, 2007 Quote> Or is it just the number of crybaby liberals who are hoping that we lose the war? Looks like you're going to have to add all the "crybaby conservatives" who "want us to lose the war" to your diatribes! Yup...damn John McCain and his "We've lost the war in Iraq" comments!!! ... oh, wait...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #59 May 11, 2007 >Yup...damn John McCain and his "We've lost the war in Iraq" comments!!! John McCain: --------------------------- There is no reason for the United States of America to remain in Iraq. The American people want them home, I believe the majority of Congress wants them home, and to set an artificial date of March 31 or even February 1, in my view, is not acceptable. The criteria should be to bring them home as rapidly and safely as possible, an evolution which I think could be completed in a matter of weeks. Our continued military presence in Iraq allows another situation to arise which could then lead to the wounding, killing or capture of American fighting men and women. We should do all in our power to avoid that. . . . Certain dates, Mr. President, are not the criteria here. What is the criteria and what should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal from Iraq. And if we do not do that and other Americans die, other Americans are wounded, other Americans are captured because we stay too long--longer than necessary--then I would say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress of the United States who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution of the United States and mandate that they be brought home quickly and safely as possible. . . . I know that this debate is going to go on this afternoon and I have a lot more to say, but the argument that somehow the United States would suffer a loss to our prestige and our viability, as far as the No. 1 superpower in the world, I think is baloney. The fact is, we won the cold war. The fact is, we won the Persian Gulf conflict. And the fact is that the United States is still the only major world superpower. I can tell you what will erode our prestige. I can tell you what will hurt our viability as the world's superpower, and that is if we enmesh ourselves in a drawn-out situation which entails the loss of American lives, more debacles. . . We suffered a terrible tragedy in Beirut, Mr. President; 240 young marines lost their lives, but we got out. Now is the time for us to get out of Iraq as rapidly and as promptly and as safely as possible. I, along with many others, will have an amendment that says exactly that. It does not give any date certain. It does not say anything about any other missions that the United States may need or feels it needs to carry out. It will say that we should get out as rapidly and orderly as possible. ---------------------------------- oops, sorry, that was about Somalia, not Iraq. My mistake! Funny how a "let-the-terrorists-win defeatocrat" becomes a hawk when the president is the right party. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joedirt 0 #60 May 11, 2007 I have no issue with either of your points ...they just aren't related to mine. *** If you beleive these reasons aren't relevent as to how the German people let Hitler get into power... then we have very different "perspectives on history". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marcandalysse 0 #61 May 11, 2007 QuoteI say this as a historian....Studying the past to predict the future is a complete red herring in my opinion If you think that, why be a 'historian'? Just for your curiosity's sake? "He who forgets the past is condemned to repeat it" George Santayana "The reason angels can fly is that they take themselves so lightly." --GK Chesterton Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #62 May 11, 2007 QuoteI have no issue with either of your points ...they just aren't related to mine. *** If you beleive these reasons aren't relevent as to how the German people let Hitler get into power... then we have very different "perspectives on history". It's possible weather patterns influencing crop production were also relevent...it's just not a tangent I care to take. Feel free to start your own 'Why It Can't Happen Here' thread.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DZJ 0 #63 May 12, 2007 QuoteQuoteI say this as a historian....Studying the past to predict the future is a complete red herring in my opinion If you think that, why be a 'historian'? Just for your curiosity's sake?I study history because it fascinates me in its own right, and because a proper understanding of the present requires a decent understanding of the past. To try and project that forwards, however, is usually folly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
