Home | Community | Message Board


Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineBleaK
paradox
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 1,583
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
long conversations at home. (nessesity of war)
    #3405166 - 11/24/04 07:20 PM (12 years, 5 months ago)

so i live in a household with 4 -5 differnt ppl(depending on the time of year) from different families. all of us are pretty interested in politics/philosophy/psychology and or, sociology. humanology, i'll say. and history to some extent.

so a long talk starts up while im sitting on the couch, smoking a bowl, with one of my roomates, and we start talkin about world events/issues.

i tend to take a, somewhat uninformed point of view, in the sense that i dont have alot of history knowlage, or even that much current events. im more of a psychology/philosphy/sociology buff.

this peticular roomate is more into politics and current events, and history.
very interesting conversation always comes out of the combination, of his information, and my questioning.

the heat of the conversation probly started around the idea that the american news, and govt feeds its people.
that a group of people in the world, hate us, because we are sinners from theyre percpective.
when i hear "they hate our freedoms" im thinking, that the implication is, that "they" are enthusiastically religeous. and since we dont perscribe to their beliefs, we are evil, from their perspective.
by biblical standards, someone who practiced magic might be burned. since they were portrayed as "anti-us" since we are god, or allied with him, and u are satan, or or allied with him.
im not going to get into religeous history and its implications.


so is this the case? that they hate us because we are, not which they assosiate with god?
why would we sell weapons to people like that?(http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/23/news-crogan.php)

or. are these people angry with us for a different reason?

i think about what would make me angry, or hatefull towards someone.
if they infringed on my way of life, would be a large catagorization, and example of that.

im not going to be mad at someone because they dont believe in my god.
they can go to hell.
thats rationality.
i will be angry if they prevent me from worshiping my own god. or satisfying my own needs spiritual and otherwise.

so have we done that?

the conversation between my roomate and i, from here, progressed into a talk about pre industrial societys, and the origin of war.

i had asked about the underlying cause of war. originally.
someone had something, that someone else wanted. example;
community A; of hunter/gatherers, and,
community B;
and for the sake of acuracy, community C, D, E, F, and G.
they all exist in different areas, but seeing as the earth is a sphere, they all interconect..

so as these tribes grow slowly, they meet each other, and start to notice one another hunting and gathering in the same area.
scarcity arises??
competition for space begins? people spread out... these kinds of things..
natural selection working, survival of the fittest right?

so i began to wonder. if the world as it stands now, is somewhat like large organizations of tribes. that have, for the purpose of aquiring the resources they need to live. banded together and, gone to war with, or occupied nearby tribes, takin their resources in the process.

seems to make more sense than the enthusiastic religeous people explanation.

if this be the case. then it would seem that the remedy would be the most basic of schoolyard problem solving.
the premise is, that there are limited resources in the world, and they must be shared.

if its true that we need to occupy other territories, in order to sustain ourselves.
then we are living under the implication, that we are more important than them.

so why are people suposedly angry with us?

i can at least imagine the perspective of someone who grew up in a deeply religeous family.
but i dont think there could be many people who would kill themselves, just to kill others as a statement.

so why would we sell weapons to a country which was populated by people who were willing to kill for their beliefs? and, theyre beliefs, were not the same as ours.
and is that really the truth of how they are?

lets talk about religeon a little bit.
from my roomate and i's perspective, religeon appears to be a tool for generating political power. in the way it was used by the romans for example.
the more followers u have, the bigger your army is, the more resources u can controll. and, the less likely it is another tribe, or army will be able to take what resources you have. so be fruitfull and multiply im told.
so was religeon the father of politics?
i realize im talking about only a portion of religeon.

so were waring.
is it nessisary that people are dying now?
would people really sacrafice themselves because some other people on the otherside of the planet are being sinfull?
would you do that for your religeon?

im completely blown away that anyone would choose war over peace.

do we need to destroy others to support our way of life in america?
do we deserve that? or need it?
is it possible for the world, to realize is it a sphere?
do you think your life is any more or less important that anyone elses?
why must we have more babies when there are orphans in the world?

people will say, well, theyre not my orphans. why should i deal with it? its just more work for me.

but they are here with you.
and if they dont get what they need in peacefull way.
they will try to take it in a non-peacefull way.
thats nature. right?
so since we have the ability to realize our inseperability.
shouldnt we live as the new-agers say "as one"?

i dont know if theres much point to this post.
i cant tell if the world is chaos, or organized chaos.
but i see death and pain in the world, and i fear that i may be directly or indirectly, partially, or majorly the cause of this death and pain. and in any case i am certainly a target of outcry.

i have experienced some pain.
and i didnt enjoy it, nor ask for it. and i see no reason for anyone to edure it.

do we need to destroy others to support our way of life in america?
do we deserve that? or need it?
is it possible for the world, to realize is it a sphere?
do you think your life is any more or less important that anyone elses?
why must we have more babies when there are orphans in the world?

am i crazy?

this is only touching on an even broader conversation that involved more extensive talking about religeon and the monetary system in america which i wont go into here. its been disscused elsewhere recently.

its 5 am, im going to sleep now.

what say you?


--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma


Edited by BleaK (11/24/04 08:48 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBleaK
paradox
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 1,583
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: BleaK]
    #3431201 - 12/01/04 03:49 AM (12 years, 4 months ago)

bump


--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBleaK
paradox
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 1,583
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: BleaK]
    #3451157 - 12/05/04 08:30 PM (12 years, 4 months ago)

i cant believe this didnt inspire any responses.....


--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDNKYD
Turtle!

Registered: 09/24/04
Posts: 12,326
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: BleaK]
    #3451977 - 12/05/04 11:14 PM (12 years, 4 months ago)

The real characters behind the world's wars are from old, old, old banking families. For these people, money is no object. They will fund/arm any/all government(s) in a war/conflict, because that war needs to go on. Without war, we have no hierarchy. So while wars may, on the outside, seem like they are being fought in the name of "religion", or natural resources, or more territory, there is a deeper, more sophisticated reason for that conflict. These are just ideas to sell to the general public. Ongoing wars slowly consolidate more and more power into the hands of few, until all of the power is in their hands. New World Order.....


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: BleaK]
    #3451991 - 12/05/04 11:18 PM (12 years, 4 months ago)

BleaK writes:

the heat of the conversation probly started around the idea that the american news, and govt feeds its people.

I don't know how to respond to this because I can't parse the grammar of it. Could you clarify?

that a group of people in the world, hate us, because we are sinners from theyre percpective.

This is correct -- they do see the West as sinners, ungodly, blasphemous, etc. However, I personally have no issue with anyone hating "us" for our beliefs (or lack thereof) as long as they don't act on their beliefs.

when i hear "they hate our freedoms" im thinking, that the implication is, that "they" are enthusiastically religeous. and since we dont perscribe to their beliefs, we are evil, from their perspective.

You got it.

so is this the case? that they hate us because we are, not which they assosiate with god?

Correct.

or. are these people angry with us for a different reason?

Also a possibility.

im not going to be mad at someone because they dont believe in my god.
they can go to hell.
thats rationality.


Religious fundamentalists by definition don't value rationality as highly as they value their faith.

i will be angry if they prevent me from worshiping my own god. or satisfying my own needs spiritual and otherwise.

so have we done that?


Nope.

i had asked about the underlying cause of war. originally.
someone had something, that someone else wanted.


That's pretty much it.

seems to make more sense than the enthusiastic religeous people explanation.

Going to war to obtain something material owned by someone else is immoral, but at least it is rational. Going to war because someone else is "disrespecting the will of God" is irrational. This doesn't mean one can't go to war for irrational reasons.

if its true that we need to occupy other territories, in order to sustain ourselves.
then we are living under the implication, that we are more important than them.


If it is true, then that follows, yes. However, it is not necessarily true.

but i dont think there could be many people who would kill themselves, just to kill others as a statement.

Define "many". It depends on the mindset of the person in question, no? Radical Islamists for example have less qualms about killing themselves in order to wipe out unbelievers than do Buddhists for example.

from my roomate and i's perspective, religeon appears to be a tool for generating political power.

It can be used to seize political power, true. However, you've got a long way to go to prove that this is what it was designed for, especially when you consider the broad variety of religions out there. Taoism, for example, isn't really well-suited to being used to seize political power.

in the way it was used by the romans for example.

Sorry, you've lost me. The "religion" of the Romans was a lot closer to what we would term today "superstition" than it was to current religions. The Romans were famous for allowing religious freedom to their subjects, and (with a few very minor exceptions) Roman politics were completely uninfluenced by Roman religion.

the more followers u have, the bigger your army is, the more resources u can controll. and, the less likely it is another tribe, or army will be able to take what resources you have. so be fruitfull and multiply im told.
so was religeon the father of politics?


In the sense that in some early cultures the closest thing some small tribes had to a "leader" was their priest or shaman, then you could put forth that argument, yes. However, the dynamic changes considerably once you move past groups of a few dozen nomadic tribesmen and start considering nations or city-states such as Athens or Rome.

would people really sacrafice themselves because some other people on the otherside of the planet are being sinfull?

Obviously so. Read the news.

would you do that for your religeon?

I'm an atheist.

im completely blown away that anyone would choose war over peace.

Depends on what kind of peace, doesn't it? Roman slaves were "at peace". Some put up with it. Others revolted. Some believe "better dead than Red". Others believe the reverse. Is freedom worth dying for? Not everyone answers "yes" to that question.

do we need to destroy others to support our way of life in america?

Nope.

do we deserve that? or need it?

Deserve what? To be destroyed?

is it possible for the world, to realize is it a sphere?

I preume this is a rhetorical question, as I fail to see what relevance it has to this portion of your musings.

do you think your life is any more or less important that anyone elses?

My life is unquestionably more important than the life of a serial rapist.

why must we have more babies when there are orphans in the world?

Because people love to fuck.

people will say, well, theyre not my orphans. why should i deal with it? its just more work for me.

but they are here with you.
and if they dont get what they need in peacefull way.
they will try to take it in a non-peacefull way.


Are you saying that since someone I never met is incapable of raising a child (or was killed before they could complete the task) that child has the right to take my stuff from me? Because that's bullshit.

thats nature. right?

Man qua man does not (and cannot) survive through the same methods instinctually-driven animals employ. "Nature" refers to the nature of all living entities, of which humans are one kind.

so since we have the ability to realize our inseperability.
shouldnt we live as the new-agers say "as one"?


No, we shouldn't, because we are not inseparable. You assume facts not in evidence.

i dont know if theres much point to this post.

Perhaps this is why you aren't getting any replies to it. I won't say it is pointless, but in my opinion it belongs more in the Spirituality and Philosophy Forum than in Politics, Activism, and Law. You'd doubtless get a lot more commentary there than here. I can move it if you'd like.

i cant tell if the world is chaos, or organized chaos.

Neither.

but i see death and pain in the world, and i fear that i may be directly or indirectly, partially, or majorly the cause of this death and pain. and in any case i am certainly a target of outcry.

Why do you fear you are in any way responsible for the pain and/or deaths of others? What have you done to cause their pain and/or death?

i have experienced some pain.
and i didnt enjoy it, nor ask for it. and i see no reason for anyone to edure it.


Pain is part of the human condition. Always has been, always will be. There doesn't have to be a reason for it.

am i crazy?

Possibly. Do you think you're crazy?




pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: DNKYD]
    #3452005 - 12/05/04 11:22 PM (12 years, 4 months ago)

DNKYD writes:

The real characters behind the world's wars are from old, old, old banking families.

Incorrect. Was Hitler from an old banking family? Mao? Saddam Hussein? The seemingly endless stream of tinpot African tribal warlords? Give us a break.

Without war, we have no hierarchy.

Bullshit. Is the government of Sweden not hierarchical? How about Switzerland?



pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDNKYD
Turtle!

Registered: 09/24/04
Posts: 12,326
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: Phred]
    #3452016 - 12/05/04 11:25 PM (12 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
DNKYD writes:

The real characters behind the world's wars are from old, old, old banking families.

Incorrect. Was Hitler from an old banking family? Mao? Saddam Hussein? The seemingly endless stream of tinpot African tribal warlords? Give us a break.

Without war, we have no hierarchy.

Bullshit. Is the government of Sweden not hierarchical? How about Switzerland?



pinky




Did I say Hitler was from an old banking family? No. MOST of the wars of the world are funded by these people. Hitler was definitely funded by these characters.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBleaK
paradox
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 1,583
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: Phred]
    #3452406 - 12/06/04 12:40 AM (12 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
BleaK writes:

the heat of the conversation probly started around the idea that the american news, and govt feeds its people.

I don't know how to respond to this because I can't parse the grammar of it. Could you clarify?

that a group of people in the world, hate us, because we are sinners from theyre percpective.

This is correct -- they do see the West as sinners, ungodly, blasphemous, etc. However, I personally have no issue with anyone hating "us" for our beliefs (or lack thereof) as long as they don't act on their beliefs.

when i hear "they hate our freedoms" im thinking, that the implication is, that "they" are enthusiastically religeous. and since we dont perscribe to their beliefs, we are evil, from their perspective.

You got it.

so is this the case? that they hate us because we are, not which they assosiate with god?

Correct.

or. are these people angry with us for a different reason?

Also a possibility.

im not going to be mad at someone because they dont believe in my god.
they can go to hell.
thats rationality.


Religious fundamentalists by definition don't value rationality as highly as they value their faith.

i will be angry if they prevent me from worshiping my own god. or satisfying my own needs spiritual and otherwise.

so have we done that?


Nope.



this is where it gets fuzzy.
i just read a reply from Krishna that i'll quote now;
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/3451185/an/0/page/0/gonew/1#UNREAD
"but in our plans to "develop" them, we fail to look at numerous variables. take, for example, the building of large dams in india to generate power. now the claim from the neo-liberal globalisation side of it all is that this development will allow India to become a part of the industrialised world, that only through this development will India be able to solve her problems, etc. However, they brush aside the tens of thousands of farmers who will have to relocate themselves, because their traditional farm-lands are going to be flooded in the creation of this dam. They brush aside the fact that the vast majority of the power generated by the dam will go to support operations by Multi-National corporations - operations that, for the most part, will not "give back" to the community in which they operate. Sure, they'll offer some jobs. And perhaps a meager existence is better than starvation, yeah? But what about the huge profits that they make? Now I'm not saying that India should stay in its old traditions completely - I'm just saying that the development has to come from within the country - and not be imposed upon the country. When it is imposed, it often serves the interests of the West more than it does the interest of the people of that country."
Quote:



i had asked about the underlying cause of war. originally.
someone had something, that someone else wanted.


That's pretty much it.

seems to make more sense than the enthusiastic religeous people explanation.

Going to war to obtain something material owned by someone else is immoral, but at least it is rational. Going to war because someone else is "disrespecting the will of God" is irrational. This doesn't mean one can't go to war for irrational reasons.

if its true that we need to occupy other territories, in order to sustain ourselves.
then we are living under the implication, that we are more important than them.


If it is true, then that follows, yes. However, it is not necessarily true.



this is the main question im posing.
Quote:



but i dont think there could be many people who would kill themselves, just to kill others as a statement.

Define "many". It depends on the mindset of the person in question, no? Radical Islamists for example have less qualms about killing themselves in order to wipe out unbelievers than do Buddhists for example.

from my roomate and i's perspective, religeon appears to be a tool for generating political power.

It can be used to seize political power, true. However, you've got a long way to go to prove that this is what it was designed for, especially when you consider the broad variety of religions out there. Taoism, for example, isn't really well-suited to being used to seize political power.

in the way it was used by the romans for example.

Sorry, you've lost me. The "religion" of the Romans was a lot closer to what we would term today "superstition" than it was to current religions. The Romans were famous for allowing religious freedom to their subjects, and (with a few very minor exceptions) Roman politics were completely uninfluenced by Roman religion.

the more followers u have, the bigger your army is, the more resources u can controll. and, the less likely it is another tribe, or army will be able to take what resources you have. so be fruitfull and multiply im told.
so was religeon the father of politics?


In the sense that in some early cultures the closest thing some small tribes had to a "leader" was their priest or shaman, then you could put forth that argument, yes. However, the dynamic changes considerably once you move past groups of a few dozen nomadic tribesmen and start considering nations or city-states such as Athens or Rome.

would people really sacrafice themselves because some other people on the otherside of the planet are being sinfull?

Obviously so. Read the news.



im trying to imply that there is more to it.
Quote:



would you do that for your religeon?

I'm an atheist.

im completely blown away that anyone would choose war over peace.

Depends on what kind of peace, doesn't it? Roman slaves were "at peace". Some put up with it. Others revolted. Some believe "better dead than Red". Others believe the reverse. Is freedom worth dying for? Not everyone answers "yes" to that question.

do we need to destroy others to support our way of life in america?

Nope.



how come your more sure this time than u were a moment ago?
Quote:



do we deserve that? or need it?

Deserve what? To be destroyed?


do we deserve the world more than others, is the question
Quote:



is it possible for the world, to realize is it a sphere?

I preume this is a rhetorical question, as I fail to see what relevance it has to this portion of your musings.


this ties into the oneness idea in the forthcomming section.
Quote:



do you think your life is any more or less important that anyone elses?

My life is unquestionably more important than the life of a serial rapist.



why did u choose a serial rapist? simply because people do bad things, doesnt make them bad. they have the potential for good.
Quote:



why must we have more babies when there are orphans in the world?

Because people love to fuck.


c-o-n-t-r-a-c-e-p-t-i-o-n
Quote:



people will say, well, theyre not my orphans. why should i deal with it? its just more work for me.

but they are here with you.
and if they dont get what they need in peacefull way.
they will try to take it in a non-peacefull way.


Are you saying that since someone I never met is incapable of raising a child (or was killed before they could complete the task) that child has the right to take my stuff from me? Because that's bullshit.


that is exactly what im saying.
I DID NOT ASK TO BE HERE.
i realize that neither did u. but THIS IS THE BURDEN PARENTS NEED TO THINK OF.
creating life is releasing it into the world.
for the inverse. is it right for a child to be brought into the world and then starved?
Quote:



thats nature. right?

Man qua man does not (and cannot) survive through the same methods instinctually-driven animals employ. "Nature" refers to the nature of all living entities, of which humans are one kind.

so since we have the ability to realize our inseperability.
shouldnt we live as the new-agers say "as one"?


No, we shouldn't, because we are not inseparable. You assume facts not in evidence.


this is why i mentioned the earth being a sphere.
if i am hungry, and i am near you, and you have food. i will ask for some.
if you take more than u need, i will have not enough. and i will attempt to take what i need from whomever i can.
Quote:



i dont know if theres much point to this post.

Perhaps this is why you aren't getting any replies to it. I won't say it is pointless, but in my opinion it belongs more in the Spirituality and Philosophy Forum than in Politics, Activism, and Law. You'd doubtless get a lot more commentary there than here. I can move it if you'd like.

i cant tell if the world is chaos, or organized chaos.

Neither.

but i see death and pain in the world, and i fear that i may be directly or indirectly, partially, or majorly the cause of this death and pain. and in any case i am certainly a target of outcry.

Why do you fear you are in any way responsible for the pain and/or deaths of others? What have you done to cause their pain and/or death?




i fear that in the least i will be viewed as responsible...
and the target of backlash.
on 9/11 suposedly, people who were angry, attacked us.
im not sure what i might have done.
i could speculate its my overbearing industrialized country that is bullying other worlds. building damns for example. and displacing farmers...
Quote:



i have experienced some pain.
and i didnt enjoy it, nor ask for it. and i see no reason for anyone to edure it.


Pain is part of the human condition. Always has been, always will be. There doesn't have to be a reason for it.

am i crazy?

Possibly. Do you think you're crazy?




pinky




--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: BleaK]
    #3452644 - 12/06/04 01:16 AM (12 years, 4 months ago)

BleaK writes:

i just read a reply from Krishna that i'll quote now;

Why did you quote that reply? It has nothing to do with the question you asked nor my reply to it. But to address that particular tangent anyway... Dams get built. Lots of people benefit from the dam, some people don't. That is true not only in India, but everywhere a dam is built in a populated area. This is nothing new. People in America bitch like hell every time a dam is built, too.

this is the main question im posing.

Then the answer is -- no, "we" don't have to occupy the territory of others in order to survive and even to thrive.

how come your more sure this time than u were a moment ago?

I was no less sure in my first answer than I am in this one, it's just that you are unclear about who is "we". Is it humankind or is it Americans or what? For example, if a village in Bangladesh is wiped out by a mudslide caused by a monsoon, clearly the ex-inhabitants of that village must then attempt to survive in a territory currently occupied by others -- i.e. the next village over.

But do humans need to destroy other humans in order to survive? Only if those other humans are attempting to initiate violence against them. Otherwise, they need not destroy them.

do we deserve the world more than others, is the question

Again, who is this "we" you keep using? It is very difficult to answer precisely questions framed in such a vague manner.

why did u choose a serial rapist?

To answer the question you asked. Clearly my life has more value than that of a serial rapist.

simply because people do bad things, doesnt make them bad.

Yes it does, if they do it repeatedly. A serial rapist is a bad person, period. That is not debatable.

they have the potential for good.

Then it's too bad they chose not to fulfill that potential. Cuz if caught they will be killed. Justice.

c-o-n-t-r-a-c-e-p-t-i-o-n

Contraception is not infallible, nor is it always readily available, nor do people always even want to use it.

THIS IS THE BURDEN PARENTS NEED TO THINK OF.

Many do. Many don't. Sucks, doesn't it?

is it right for a child to be brought into the world and then starved?

That's a question best asked in the Spirituality and Philosophy forum. I ask again, would you like me to move this thread there?

if i am hungry, and i am near you, and you have food. i will ask for some.
if you take more than u need, i will have not enough.


If I take your food from you, yes. If I earn my food through peaceful methods, you have no claim on it. My buying seven pizzas at one crack does not prevent you from buying one for yourself.

and i will attempt to take what i need from whomever i can.

Then they'll probably attempt to either kill you or to restrict your aggressive actions in some other way -- with good reason.

im not sure what i might have done.

You didn't do anything. Shrink your ego, dude. Do you honestly think that if "BleaK" had never existed, the nutbars wouldn't have crashed planes into the WTC and the Pentagon?

i could speculate its my overbearing industrialized country that is bullying other worlds. building damns for example. and displacing farmers...

This whole "building dams" stuff is ludicrous. What do you think happens here anyway? Do you think the prez of the US or the Prime Minister of England phones the prime minister of India and says, "Allow us to build a dam in your country or we'll bomb you back to the stone age" ?

No dam gets built in India if the Indian parliament doesn't want it built. The people of India elect their government.


pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSWEDEN
Miracle of Science

Registered: 10/25/04
Posts: 2,577
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: long conversations at home. (nessesity of war) [Re: Phred]
    #3455266 - 12/06/04 05:13 PM (12 years, 4 months ago)

Prescott Bush contributed to Hitler's war chest.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* thinking about the war...
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 1,842 25 04/11/03 08:09 AM
by Anonymous
* Psychology of War Ancalagon 396 3 05/07/05 03:43 PM
by Annapurna1
* 'Debating' the Iraq War
( 1 2 all )
Ancalagon 3,114 23 06/20/06 12:51 PM
by zappaisgod
* Unicef makes "Smurfs" anti-war cartoon
RandalFlagg
815 11 10/12/05 12:19 AM
by LazyGnome
* My thoughts, Iraq, war, and genocide Ellis Dee 1,203 14 03/18/03 06:11 AM
by Anonymous
* Did the war in Iraq enhance our security? infidelGOD 428 10 05/05/03 03:45 PM
by Azmodeus
* i know how the faggot republicans can pay for all their stupid wars
( 1 2 3 all )
KingOftheThing 3,295 54 09/15/06 07:12 PM
by zappaisgod
* The relocation of Israel and the exiled Jew.
( 1 2 all )
nakors_junk_bag 1,223 21 12/13/05 01:03 PM
by SirTripAlot

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
729 topic views. 1 members, 2 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Out-Grow.com - Mushroom Growing Kits & Supplies
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.169 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 14 queries.