Home | Community | Message Board


Original Seeds Store - Cannabis Seeds
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!

Amazon Shop: Portable Greenhouse

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
I didn't write it, but I like it!
    #720518 - 07/03/02 03:31 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

10 Great Things About America
Dinesh D'Souza
Thursday, July 4, 2002
In the aftermath of last September's terrorist attack, we've heard a great deal about "why they hate us" and about why America is so bad. We?ve endured lengthy lectures about America?s history of slavery, about the defects of American foreign policy, about the materialism of American life, and about the excesses of American culture. In the view of many critics at home and abroad, America can do no right.
This indictment, which undermines the patriotism of Americans, is based on a narrow and distorted understanding of America. It exaggerates America?s faults and ignores what is good and even great about America.

As an immigrant who has chosen to become a U.S. citizen, I feel especially qualified to say what is special about this country. Having grown up in a different society ? in my case, Mumbai, India ? I am not only able to identify aspects of America that are invisible to people who have always lived here, but also acutely conscious of the daily blessings that I enjoy in America.

Here, then, is my list of the 10 great things about America.

1. America provides an amazingly good life for the ordinary guy.

Rich people live well everywhere. But what distinguishes America is that it provides an incomparably high standard of living for the "common man.? We now live in a country where construction workers regularly pay $4 for a nonfat latte, where maids drive nice cars, and where plumbers take their families on vacation to Europe.

Indeed, newcomers to the United States are struck by the amenities enjoyed by "poor" people in the United States. This fact was dramatized in the 1980s when CBS television broadcast the documentary "People Like Us," which was intended to show the miseries of the poor during an ongoing recession. The Soviet Union also broadcast the documentary, with a view to embarrassing the Reagan administration.

But by the testimony of former Soviet leaders, it had the opposite effect. Ordinary people across the Soviet Union saw that the poorest Americans have TV sets, microwave ovens and cars. They arrived at the same perception that I witnessed in an acquaintance of mine from Bombay who has been unsuccessfully trying to move to the United States.

I asked him, "Why are you so eager to come to America?" He replied, "I really want to live in a country where the poor people are fat."

2. America offers more opportunity and social mobility than any other country, including the countries of Europe.

America is the only country that has created a population of "self-made tycoons." Only in America could Pierre Omidyar, whose parents are Iranian and who grew up in Paris, have started a company like eBay. Only in America could Vinod Khosla, the son of an Indian army officer, become a leading venture capitalist, the shaper of the technology industry, and a billionaire to boot.

Admittedly, tycoons are not typical, but no country has created a better ladder than America for people to ascend from modest circumstances to success.

3. Work and trade are respectable in America, which is not true elsewhere.

Historically, most cultures have despised the merchant and the laborer, regarding the former as vile and corrupt and the latter as degraded and vulgar. Some cultures, such as that of ancient Greece and medieval Islam, even held that it is better to acquire things through plunder than through trade or contract labor.

But the American founders altered this moral hierarchy. They established a society in which the life of the businessman, and of the people who work for him, would be a noble calling. In the American view, there is nothing vile or degraded about serving your customers either as a CEO or as a waiter.

The ordinary life of production and supporting a family is more highly valued in the United States than in any other country. Indeed, America is the only country in the world where we call the waiter "sir," as if he were a knight.

4. America has achieved greater social equality than any other society.

True, there are large inequalities of income and wealth in America. In purely economic terms, Europe is more egalitarian. But Americans are socially more equal than any other people, and this is unaffected by economic disparities. Alexis De Tocqueville noticed this egalitarianism a century and a half ago, but it is if anything more prevalent today.

For all his riches, Bill Gates could not approach the typical American and say, "Here?s a $100 bill. I'll give it to you if you kiss my feet." Most likely the person would tell Gates to go to hell! The American view is that the rich guy may have more money, but he isn?t in any fundamental sense better than anyone else.

5. People live longer, fuller lives in America.

Although protesters rail against the American version of technological capitalism at trade meetings around the world, in reality the American system has given citizens many more years of life, and the means to live more intensely and actively.

In 1900, the life expectancy in America was around 50 years; today, it is more than 75 years. Advances in medicine and agriculture are mainly responsible for the change. This extension of the lifespan means more years to enjoy life, more free time to devote to a good cause, and more occasions to do things with the grandchildren.

In many countries, people who are old seem to have nothing to do; they just wait to die. In America, the old are incredibly vigorous, and people in their 70s pursue the pleasures of life, including remarriage and sexual gratification, with a zeal that I find unnerving.

6. In America, the destiny of the young is not given to them but is created by them.

Not long ago, I asked myself, "What would my life have been like if I had never come to the United States?"

If I had remained in India, I would probably have lived my whole life within a five-mile radius of where I was born. I would undoubtedly have married a woman of my identical religious and socioeconomic background. I would almost certainly have become a medical doctor, or an engineer, or a computer programmer. I would have socialized entirely within my ethnic community.

I would have a whole set of opinions that could be predicted in advance; indeed, they would not be very different from what my father believed, or his father before him. In sum, my destiny would, to a large degree, have been given to me.

In America, I have seen my life take a radically different course. In college I became interested in literature and politics, and I resolved to make a career as a writer. I married a woman whose ancestry is English, French, Scotch-Irish, German and American Indian.

In my 20s I found myself working as a policy analyst in the White House, even though I was not an American citizen. No other country, I am sure, would have permitted a foreigner to work in its inner citadel of government.

In most countries in the world, your fate and your identity are handed to you; in America, you determine them for yourself. America is a country where you get to write the script of your own life. Your life is like a blank sheet of paper, and you are the artist.

This notion of being the architect of your own destiny is the incredibly powerful idea that is behind the worldwide appeal of America. Young people especially find irresistible the prospect of authoring the narrative of their own lives.

7. America has gone further than any other society in establishing equality of rights.

There is nothing distinctively American about slavery or bigotry. Slavery has existed in virtually every culture, and xenophobia, prejudice and discrimination are worldwide phenomena. Western civilization is the only civilization to mount a principled campaign against slavery; no country expended more treasure and blood to get rid of slavery than the United States.

While racism remains a problem in America, this country has made strenuous efforts to eradicate discrimination, even to the extent of enacting policies that give legal preference in university admissions, jobs and government contracts to members of minority groups. Such policies remain controversial, but the point is that it is extremely unlikely that a racist society would have permitted such policies in the first place.

And surely African Americans like Jesse Jackson are vastly better off living in America than they would be if they were to live in, say, Ethiopia or Somalia.

8. America has found a solution to the problem of religious and ethnic conflict that continues to divide and terrorize much of the world.

Visitors to places like New York are amazed to see the way in which Serbs and Croatians, Sikhs and Hindus, Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants, Jews and Palestinians all seem to work and live together in harmony. How is this possible when these same groups are spearing each other and burning each other?s homes in so many places in the world?

The American answer is twofold. First, separate the spheres of religion and government so that no religion is given official preference but all are free to practice their faith as they wish. Second, do not extend rights to racial or ethnic groups but only to individuals; in this way, all are equal in the eyes of the law, opportunity is open to anyone who can take advantage of it, and everybody who embraces the American way of life can "become American."

Of course there are exceptions to these core principles, even in America. Racial preferences are one such exception, which explains why they are controversial. But in general, America is the only country in the world that extends full membership to outsiders.

The typical American could come to India, live for 40 years and take Indian citizenship. But he could not "become Indian." He wouldn?t see himself that way, nor would most Indians see him that way. In America, by contrast, hundreds of millions have come from far-flung shores and over time they, or at least their children, have in a profound and full sense "become American."

9. America has the kindest, gentlest foreign policy of any great power in world history.

Critics of the U.S. are likely to react to this truth with sputtering outrage. They will point to longstanding American support for a Latin or Middle Eastern despot, or the unjust internment of the Japanese during World War II, or America's reluctance to impose sanctions on South Africa?s apartheid regime. However one feels about these particular cases, let us concede to the critics the point that America is not always in the right.

What the critics leave out is the other side of the ledger. Twice in the 20th century, the United States saved the world: first from the Nazi threat, then from Soviet totalitarianism. What would have been the world's fate if America had not existed? After destroying Germany and Japan in World War II, the U.S. proceeded to rebuild both countries, and today they are American allies. Now we are doing the same thing with Afghanistan.

Consider, too, how magnanimous the U.S. has been to the former Soviet Union after the U.S. victory in the Cold War. For the most part, America is an abstaining superpower: It shows no real interest in conquering and subjugating the rest of the world. (Imagine how the Soviets would have acted if they had won the Cold War.)

On occasion, America intervenes to overthrow a tyrannical regime or to halt massive human rights abuses in another country, but it never stays to rule that country. In Grenada, Haiti and Bosnia, the U.S. got in and then got out.

Moreover, when America does get into a war, it is supremely careful to avoid targeting civilians and to minimize collateral damage. Even as America bombed the Taliban infrastructure and hideouts, its planes dropped rations of food to avert hardship and starvation of Afghan civilians. What other country does these things?

10. America, the freest nation on earth, is also the most virtuous nation on earth.

This point seems counterintuitive, given the amount of conspicuous vulgarity, vice and immorality in America. Indeed, some Islamic fundamentalists argue that their regimes are morally superior to the United States because they seek to foster virtue among the citizens. Virtue, these fundamentalists argue, is a higher principle than liberty.

Indeed it is. And let us admit that in a free society, freedom will frequently be used badly. Freedom, by definition, includes the freedom to do good or evil, to act nobly or basely.

But if freedom brings out the worst in people, it also brings out the best. The millions of Americans who live decent, praiseworthy lives desire our highest admiration because they have opted for the good when the good is not the only available option. Even amidst the temptations of a rich and free society, they have remained on the straight path. Their virtue has special luster because it is freely chosen.

By contrast, the societies that many Islamic fundamentalists seek would eliminate the possibility of virtue. If the supply of virtue is insufficient in a free society like America, it is almost non-existent in an unfree society like Iran.

The reason is that coerced virtues are not virtues at all. Consider the woman who is required to wear a veil. There is no modesty in this, because she is being compelled Compulsion cannot produce virtue, it can only produce the outward semblance of virtue.

Thus, a free society like America is not merely more prosperous, more varied, more peaceful and more tolerant ? it is also morally superior to the theocratic and authoritarian regimes that America?s enemies advocate.

"To make us love our country," Edmund Burke once said, "our country ought to be lovely." Burke?s point is that we should love our country not just because it is ours, but also because it is good.

America is far from perfect, and there is lots of room for improvement. In spite of its flaws, however, the American life as it is lived today is the best life that our world has to offer. Ultimately, America is worthy of our love and sacrifice because, more than any other society, it makes possible the good life, and the life that is good.

Dinesh D'Souza's latest book, "What's So Great About America," just hit the New York Times best seller list. He is the Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/3/134711.shtml


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #720647 - 07/03/02 05:07 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Thank you for posting this. It's amazing that so many posters on this board who are born in America are so ignorant of it's virtues. I think it was Thomas Paine who said, "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/05/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #720891 - 07/03/02 07:19 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

I feel all fuzzy inside, even with my priest in jail for violationg the american view of "corporate" religion.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinenugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/05/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: nugsarenice]
    #720893 - 07/03/02 07:20 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

for life.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,247
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 11 days, 8 hours
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: nugsarenice]
    #721982 - 07/04/02 08:04 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Most of the above it true..I can't argue it...the one thing I can argue though is all this American prosperity is coming at a cost to the poorer, undeveloped nations. But if you don't see a problem with that, then it's not an issue is it?


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Edited by Rono (07/04/02 08:07 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinehongomon
old hand
Registered: 04/14/02
Posts: 910
Loc: comin' at ya
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722170 - 07/04/02 10:06 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Rono, if you can explain to me why we over here can't or won't understand the global ramifications of our prosperity, I would love to hear it.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,247
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 11 days, 8 hours
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: hongomon]
    #722261 - 07/04/02 11:20 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Sounds good to me...Let's get down to specifics. What would you call a country that produces the highest levels of dangerous chemicals in the world but abandons key negotiations aimed at reversing global warming?
How about a country whose leader blithely announces that he is abandoning a quarter-century old arms control treaty, one the whole world understands to be the key to preventing complete nuclear madness?
And what about a government that walks out of talks to enforce the biological weapons treaty because it doesn't want international inspectors peeking at its own weapons production facilities?
That same country keeps rejecting human rights treaties, even the ones protecting the rights of children.

Sounds pretty roguish, don't you think? Iraq, maybe, or one of those other "evil-doers" like Iran or North Korea? But oops -- wrong guess. This particular rogue state would be the good ol' U.S. of A

It's hard for most people to think of the U.S as a rogue state. You're a democracy, after all...or Republic..whichever you prefer. Your elections are free and fair (well, some of the time).

But your foreign policy is far less accountable to democratic ideals, or to the global community than most like to think. The problem isn't isolationism -- you''re engaged (at least your military forces and your U.S. manufactured weapons are) all over the world. The problem is unilateralism -- your tendency to act out your unchallenged 'super-power of super-powers' role without concern for what others in the world think.

When the Bush administration came into office last year, unilateralism was suddenly on everybody's radar screen. One of the administration's first acts was to cut off U.S. support to any international family planning institutions that also might provide any separately-funded information to their patients about abortions. Then, what really caught the eye of policymakers and pundits, were Bush's rapid-fire moves to abandon the Kyoto protocol on global warming and the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty.

The United States produces by far the largest amount of greenhouse gases in the world -- the stuff that is destroying the ozone layer and causing dangerous global warming. In 1998, the Clinton administration had already angered most other countries when it refused to sign on to the Kyoto agreement that aimed to roll back greenhouse gas emissions. But international talks had continued, as had efforts to get the United States on board. Until Bush took office. Then, all of a sudden, Kyoto was off Washington's agenda.

In January 2002, the Bush administration decided to rub salt into the world's wound, dissing the whole Kyoto process by announcing a separate, unilateral plan. The new plan would, coincidentally, leave current U.S. greenhouse gas levels and the resulting increase in global warming virtually unchanged...how nice for everyone else.

Then came the problem of weapons of mass destruction. In October 1999, the U.S. Senate refused to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, a long-sought effort at keeping the U.S. and Soviet nuclear genies closer to their bottles. The world was not amused. Many, especially in Europe, were outraged, seeing the rejection as the arrogance of what the French had begun calling the "hyper-power." So when Bush announced, in early 2001, that he planned to unilaterally scrap the 25-year-old ABM treaty, it wasn't only Moscow that felt betrayed. The ABM treaty had served as the focal point of strategic arms control for an entire generation. Bush's claim that it was "irrelevant" in the post-Cold War era fooled no one....or at least it shouldn't have. The only thing that had become irrelevant -- to the United States -- was international concern about the Pentagon's war drive. Your only super-power rival had collapsed more than a decade ago, but the government had no intention of changing its own aggressive behavior.

Only two countries in the world have refused to sign the Convention on the Rights of the Child -- Somalia and the United States...explain that???

In the summer of 2001, the United States walked out of another international conference, this one on how to enforce the 1972 treaty prohibiting biological weapons. Everybody agreed there needed to be stronger inspections of potential sites where germ weapons could be produced -- what Washington is always accusing Iraq of hiding. But this time it wasn't the Iraqis, it was the U.S. delegation that walked out because they refused to accept international inspections of American production facilities which the United States demanded for everyone else.

On the issue of human rights, when it comes to real commitments, backed up by international agreements, Washington falls way behind. Take the Convention on the Rights of the Child. That one should be a no-brainer.

The Convention is, according to UNICEF, "the most widely and rapidly ratified human rights treaty in history..." The Convention sets norms for what governments should provide for parents and their children -- adequate nutrition, compulsory primary education, adequate health care, safe access to play, art, and culture. Only two countries in the world have refused to sign on -- Somalia and the United States....hmmmmmm

Unilateralism didn't begin with the Bush administration. Several years ago, the United States antagonized much of the world, including some of your closest allies, when it refused to sign the convention banning anti-personnel landmines.

For years the world had known that the mines -- cheap, easy to use -- were responsible for far more civilian than military deaths. The campaign to prohibit them, led by civil society organizations and governments such as Canada, was based on the vast suffering of civilians, most often children, in places where low-tech, high-casualty wars were taking place, often outside CNN's camera range.

The world needed a ban -- but still today the United States refuses to sign. Why? Because the Pentagon says it needs those anti-personnel mines to protect U.S. troops. What a heartless message your powerful military is sending around the globe, specifically to the legions of landmine victims, children with missing limbs growing up in the poor, mine-infested countries of the world.

Only seven countries voted- against the International Criminal Court...care to guess who was on side with the U.S.? Those great democracies such as China, Israel, Libya, Iraq.

Then there's the International Criminal Court. The United States spent years demanding that the world create such a court to insure that those guilty of genocide or war crimes would be held accountable. When the new court was approved, delegates from 120 countries stood and cheered. Only seven countries voted against -- led by the United States at the head of the rejectionist front. Who were Washington's bedfellows? Those stalwart democracies such as China, Israel, Libya, Iraq.

As it turned out, the United States never had any intention of signing on fearful that it would expose American troops around the world to prosecution outside the U.S. justice system. It just demanded a court for the rest of the world. The world cried foul. Finally, in the last days of his presidency, just hours before the signature deadline, on December 31, 2000, lame-ass President Clinton reluctantly signed the treaty endorsing the court -- but he explicitly rejected ever presenting to the Senate for ratification. For the United States, signing the treaty was just a way of making sure it could keep on calling the shots in future negotiations.

The United States is the strongest country in the world -- economically, militarily, strategically. But that doesn't mean that you can ignore the international laws and treaties and U.N. resolutions that you demand that others obey.

Despite your power, you're still part of the international community -- you still need the U.N. and international law. You face consequences when you throw your weight around -- being kicked off the U.N. Human Rights Commission last spring was one example. After September 11th most of the world's criticism of your unilateralism and arrogance was silenced. But now you stand in danger of losing the human sympathy that followed those attacks...despite my firm belief that your own government let them happen.



--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Edited by Rono (07/04/02 11:26 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722312 - 07/04/02 11:57 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Hmmm... there's a word I'm looking for. What could it be?

Oh yes..... Waaahhhhhhhh!


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,247
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 11 days, 8 hours
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #722317 - 07/04/02 12:00 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

So much for an intelligent rebuttle...


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleInnvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Male

Registered: 02/09/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722357 - 07/04/02 12:30 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

***What would you call a country that produces the highest levels of dangerous chemicals in the world but abandons key negotiations aimed at reversing global warming?****

The Kyoto treaty was a joke and wasn't even signed by JAPAN!!! That was one of the most useless treaties i have ever seen

****How about a country whose leader blithely announces that he is abandoning a quarter-century old arms control treaty, one the whole world understands to be the key to preventing complete nuclear madness?****

The treaty was with the U.S.S.R. Unfortunatly your whole argument is moot because the U.S.S.R. doesn't exist

*****And what about a government that walks out of talks to enforce the biological weapons treaty because it doesn't want international inspectors peeking at its own weapons production facilities?*****

Perhaps national security?

****Sounds pretty roguish, don't you think?****

The only thing that is rouge is the arguments you chose to discuss which are bad to say the least.

****It's hard for most people to think of the U.S as a rogue state. You're a democracy, after all...or Republic..whichever you prefer. Your elections are free and fair (well, some of the time).****

coming from a country that is guilty until proven innocent i'll take that as a compliment

****The problem is unilateralism -- your tendency to act out your unchallenged 'super-power of super-powers' role without concern for what others in the world think.****

Unfortunatly countries like canada benefit from our status in the world

****The United States produces by far the largest amount of greenhouse gases in the world****

Wrong...the ocean produces a majority of these supposed "greenhouse gasses" not the United states...maybe we should ban oceans?

****the stuff that is destroying the ozone layer and causing dangerous global warming.****

That's why since we have been keeping records on temp. the average temp has actually dropped either a tenth of a degree or more....this argument is never discussed in the winter..i wonder why?

****Then, all of a sudden, Kyoto was off Washington's agenda. ****

GOOD!!!! see above answer...can you name the other countries that signed the Kyoto treaty? Canada didn't either

The ABM treaty was with the U.S.S.R. Do some research

***Only two countries in the world have refused to sign the Convention on the Rights of the Child***

so what?

****what Washington is always accusing Iraq of hiding.****

That was part of the surrender agreement...do some research and quit your cutting and pasting arguments

/b]****On the issue of human rights, when it comes to real commitments, backed up by international agreements, Washington falls way behind. Take the Convention on the Rights of the Child. That one should be a no-brainer. *****

Whether you want to admit it or not the human rights of the United States is either the best or close to it. We have 270 million people to please and is a huge task to make sure all is treated well. I guess if i was a country like Canada with only 35 million it would be quite simple....BTW how's Canada treating the Native indians? I bet if you ask them Canada is lacking

****Despite your power, you're still part of the international community****

You're right, and we won't have treaty's that "lower the bar" and make us like other countries: innefficient, more corrupt, and socialist.

****you still need the U.N. and international law****

No..you need the U.N. because we fund a majority of it's operations. To think otherwise is just foolish. A majority of Americans (or close to it) don't trust the UN. International law cannot be made to violate our constitutionly mandated perameters. The american people will not have it and back out of the UN.

****You face consequences when you throw your weight around -- being kicked off the U.N. Human Rights Commission last spring was one example.****

Whose going to enact the consequences? The human rights commision didn't kick out the americans if you remember right. The human rights commision was made up of countries that have the worst human rights records in the world and the US opposed that decision and warned that the americans would cut funding?..how much does canada fund the UN?

***But now you stand in danger of losing the human sympathy that followed those attacks...despite my firm belief that your own government let them happen. ****

I think i can speak for a majority of americans when i say...so what?

I hate debating with people who find the need to cut and paste their whole post in the future could you get to the point in your own words?..or maybe supply a link.

I personnaly wish we were an isolationist country and we'd see how much power the UN, NATO, and other groups would be without our money and support



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

America....FUCK YEAH!!!

Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson


Edited by Innvertigo (07/04/02 12:34 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722361 - 07/04/02 12:32 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

You're right and I was on my way back to edit it but you beat me here.

In reply to:

Sounds good to me...Let's get down to specifics. What would you call a country that produces the highest levels of dangerous chemicals in the world but abandons key negotiations aimed at reversing global warming?
How about a country whose leader blithely announces that he is abandoning a quarter-century old arms control treaty, one the whole world understands to be the key to preventing complete nuclear madness?
And what about a government that walks out of talks to enforce the biological weapons treaty because it doesn't want international inspectors peeking at its own weapons production facilities?
That same country keeps rejecting human rights treaties, even the ones protecting the rights of children.




Not in the best interests of the US. While I'd like to see us cut back on the amount of chemicals, I don't want it at the expense of either our economy or lifestyle. As new technologies are developed this will change. It is the height of foolishness to think that the world will suffer irreversible damage if we take time to come up with ways to fix the problem gradually.

That arms treaty had outlived its usefulness years ago. It was signed with the USSR which no longer exists so it was a worthless piece of paper anyway. Since Bush announced we were withdrawing, he's also announced and come to agreement on further cuts in the amount of nukes on both side anyway. If it was only the Russians that had ballistic missiles, we'd have little or no need for an ABM defense. There are counties that have missiles or are developing or buying missiles that would like nothing better than to lob one at the US. Should we sit back and wait for this to happen and then say.... Golly Gosh, we should have taken steps to prevent something like this from happening? We'd be stupid to do so.

As to the next two treaties you refer to, perhaps when the parties working on such treaties have reasonable proposals that aren't aimed at the US, they will deserve serious consideration.

I will agree with you on one point. I don't like landmines. However, having said that... if you think that all of the countries who signed on to that will suddenly stop using them, you're sadly mistaken. Banning something does not mean squat. Drugs are banned. Did they go away? Guns are banned in many countries. Did they go away?

We are the unchallenged super power whether you like it or not. There will be one for countless years to come because, sadly, one is needed. Perhaps someday your vision of utopia will come true. But neither you nor I will be here to see it. If the US was to somehow vanish tomorrow, little would change. Some other country, China perhaps, would rush right in to fill the gap. Do you suppose they would sign or honor treaties that they did sign?

Kyoto? A piece of crap if ever there was one. When a treaty gives exemptions away willy nilly, and the bulk of the cuts would come from a small handful of countries, why would we sign it?

I could go on, but I tire of arguing with someone like yourself who sees the US as the sole source of the world?s problems. Frankly if it wasn't for us you probably wouldn't have the freedom to flap your jaws as you do and I think that?s what pisses you off the most. It would be a very different world, one I doubt you'd like. Do you think if Germany had won the war you'd be allowed to speak your mind so freely? If using Germany as an example doesn't suit you, substitute the regime of your choice. The Russians perhaps? Castro maybe?

To be blunt, you strike me as someone that would piss and moan about anyone with more wealth or power than you or your country.

We elect our leaders to look out for us, not to make you happy. The world is nowhere near ready for a world government, perhaps it never will be.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722376 - 07/04/02 12:41 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

And another thought.... If the US sucks so bad, don't come here. The flood of people trying to get in suggests that only the whiners such as yourself find it to be such a hideous place. How many tried to move to Canada last year? I realize that the terrorists like to come there so they can sneak across the border, but as a number how many? And then compare that to the amount of people that try to come here.

Yes we must be a horrible country indeed.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,247
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 11 days, 8 hours
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Innvertigo]
    #722474 - 07/04/02 01:30 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Funny how both you get so defensive of the USA the second anyone decides to post an opinion that differs from your own in the slightest.

I will be the first to admit the US is the most powerful nation around, that's never been in dispute...but don't you think that better things can be done with the seemingly infinite resources of the U.S. than destroy the rest of the world?


The Kyoto treaty was a joke and wasn't even signed by JAPAN!!! That was one of the most useless treaties i have ever seen
What part did you disagree with?..please explain.

The treaty was with the U.S.S.R. Unfortunatly your whole argument is moot because the U.S.S.R. doesn't exist
So the fact that there is no USSR gives the USA the right to keep on mass producing nuclear weapons when it already has enough to destroy the world several times over?...how much is enough for you?

Perhaps national security?
Or the fact they are also producing Biological weapons?

Unfortunatly countries like canada benefit from our status in the world
Sadly, this is 100% true.

That's why since we have been keeping records on temp. the average temp has actually dropped either a tenth of a degree or more....this argument is never discussed in the winter..i wonder why?
Is that why the polar ice caps are melting?...are they magically defying the laws of physics?

Whether you want to admit it or not the human rights of the United States is either the best or close to it. We have 270 million people to please and is a huge task to make sure all is treated well. I guess if i was a country like Canada with only 35 million it would be quite simple....BTW how's Canada treating the Native indians? I bet if you ask them Canada is lacking
If you not worried about human rights then why not sign it?..And you are right, the treatment of our natives is appalling...but this thread is about the U.S....If you like I would be more than happy to start a thread about Canada's failings in the world community if that would make you feel better.

I personnaly wish we were an isolationist country and we'd see how much power the UN, NATO, and other groups would be without our money and support
I wonder how far the US would get without having other countries to exploit their resources...or to work in their sweat shops.

I didn't have the intention of making this an Anti-American thread, because despite all of my mis-givings of the U.S. it has done some incredible things for the world. Europe is just as guilty as the U.S. on many fronts...but Unfortunately when you are the "Big Boy on the block" you are in the spot light.

You can slam my views all you like, it won't change the fact that the U.S. is not well liked world wide, and there is a reason for it. I have nothing against Americans per se, but it's your foreign policies, and hypocritical stance on many issues that I take issue with...and to a lesser extent my own country as well.

There really is no need for either of you to get all worked up..you posted your facts of the U.S...which was mostly correct, and I posted my facts of the U.S....which are also correct.













--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722503 - 07/04/02 01:50 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Defensive? No. Factual? Yes.

When your facts are wrong, they need to be corrected, which we have done. As the saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

I need to feed myself so I'll just address the one "point" you make.

_______________________________________

Understanding polar melting

By Jack Williams, USATODAY.com


Peter West, NSF
Huge Antarctic icebergs, like the one above, are not caused by global warming, scientists say.


On the Web

Resources: Climate change science.
IPCC Working Group 1: Text of Summary for Policy Makers.
Understanding polar ice
Science in the polar regions




The idea that the polar ice caps are going to melt and flood the world some time soon is a gross oversimplification.

Except for Greenland's Ice Cap, the Arctic's ice is floating in the ocean. If it melted, it wouldn't raise sea level although it would have other effects on the world's climate.

Antarctica is more complicated. While the ice shelves around the continent, such as the Ross Ice Shelf, which is roughly the size of Texas, are floating on the ocean, huge amounts of ice cover Antarctica. If all of this ice melted it would raise global sea levels by about 200 feet. But climate scientists don't expect anything like this to happen in the next couple of centuries, if ever.

For one thing, Antarctica is so cold that even the worst possible warming isn't likely to melt its ice for centuries. Still, there are concerns about what could happen to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which in theory could collapse into the sea to melt.

While all scientists who study polar ice don't agree on how much is likely to melt if the world continues warming, the January 2001 report of Working Group 1 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) offers the best summary of the latest scientific thinking. This group consisted of experts from around the world and looked at the basic science of climate change.

In its Summary for Policy Makers, the working group says on Page 16 that during the 21st century:

Northern Hemisphere snow cover and sea-ice extent are projected to decrease further.
Glaciers and ice caps are projected to continue their widespread retreat during the 21st century.
The Antarctic ice sheet is likely to grain mass because of greater precipitation, while the Greenland ice sheet is likely to lose mass because the increase in runoff will exceed the precipitation increase.
Concerns have been expressed about the stability of the West Antarctic ice sheet because it is grounded below sea level. However, loss of grounded ice leading to substantial sea level rise from this source is now widely agreed to be very unlikely during the 21st century.
Global mean sea level is projected to rise by 0.09 to 0.88 meters (0.29 to 2.88 feet) between 1990 and 2100.
The report notes that projections of sea level rise are lower slightly lower than in the Working Group's 1995 report even though the 2001 report projects higher temperatures by 2100 than the 1995 report did. The reason for the lower estimate of possible sea level rise is "primarily due to the use of improved models, which give a smaller contribution from glaciers and ice sheets" than the models used for the 1995 report.

________________________________________

Sounds terrible. If we don't address this in the next week or so we will surely all die!!!

For every scientist who thinks they are "melting", you can find one that thinks that even if they are, that they probably shrink and expand all by themselves. Perhaps that is why the Antartic ice sheet is expected to expand.

Here's another:

______________________________________
Study: Warming didn't start melting
WASHINGTON, October 8, 1999 (AP) - The massive West Antarctic ice sheet may be headed for a complete meltdown in a process that a new study indicates was triggered thousands of years ago, not as a result of global warming.



Scientific questions

Drilling into the past

Sea level rise

The ice shelves

Ice's global role

Ice on the Web


As scientists have been increasingly able to document melting and the discovery of icebergs breaking off from Antarctica in recent years, concerns have risen that human-induced climate change could be damaging the Antarctic ice sheet.

But the future of the West Antarctic ice sheet "may have been predetermined when the grounding line retreat was triggered in early Holocene time," about 10,000 years ago, a team of scientists led by Howard Conway of the University of Washington reports in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

The grounding line is the boundary between floating ice and ice thick enough to reach the sea floor, and the scientists found that line has receded about 800 miles since the last ice age, withdrawing at an average of about 400 feet per year for the last 7,600 years.

"It seems like the rate (of melting) that been going since the early Holocene is similar to the rate right now," Conway said in a telephone interview. "Collapse appears to be part of an ongoing natural cycle, probably caused by rising sea level initiated by the melting of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets at the end of the last ice age."

Continued shrinking of the ice sheet, perhaps even complete disintegration, "could well be inevitable," the report concluded.

The ice sheet's disappearance is of concern because of estimates that its complete melting could raise the global sea level by 15 to 20 feet, swamping low-lying coastal communities around the world.

At the current rate of melting, that will take about 7,000 years, the researchers estimate. Conway said the melting annually contributes about 1 millimeter - nearly one-twenty-fifth of an inch - to sea-level rise.

While the study indicates global warming is not causing the melting, climate change remains a problem, Conway said: "Global warming could well speed the process. Our study doesn't address that problem."

Environmentalists have grown concerned that industrial chemicals added to the atmosphere are trapping heat like a greenhouse, causing the Earth's temperature to increase. There is disagreement, however, about the process and how great a hazard it may pose.

Conway's report is one of three in this issue of Science focusing on the Antarctic ice sheet. In the others: Scientists studying satellite-based measurements found a complex system of tributaries feeding major rivers of ice on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. This web of tributaries forms a transition zone between the sluggish inland ice and the swiftly moving ice streams closer to the margins.

Other researchers, using the ages of volcanic debris that erupted onto the ice sheet, reconstructed the past elevation of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet as it began to melt just after the end of the last ice age. They concluded the sheet was not the source of a massive flow of melt water into the oceans 10,000 years ago.

West Antarctica is the section of the continent south of the tip of South America. It is covered by an ice sheet that extends about 360,000 square miles close to the combined areas of Texas and Colorado.

Conway's team calculated the movement of the grounding line using evidence gathered from raised beaches and radar imaging of subsurface ice structures. The timing of start of the melting was determined by carbon-14 dating of samples found on raised beaches.

_____________________________________

Hmmm.... 7000 years! Well I'm certainly scared. Now why oh why didn't we sign that Kyoto treaty 10,000 years ago when the last ice age ended. Oh wait.... the ice has come and gone before. Maybe it was those damn cavemen.




--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,247
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 11 days, 8 hours
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #722523 - 07/04/02 01:58 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

So are you agreeing with the fact that global warming is indeed occurring? And if so...how much do you think the world has contributed to it in the last 100 years?...nevermind the previous 10000.


--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Edited by Rono (07/04/02 02:01 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #722585 - 07/04/02 02:31 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

I don't belive there is sufficient evidence to support the theory of global warming being anything other than a naturally occuring cycle. Ice ages have come and gone, so to say the earth doesn't go through periods of warming and cooling would be nonsense. To blame human beings for causing it, or even speeding it up, without evidence that at least the majority of scientisits agree to, is just foolish.

To sign on to a treaty, such as the Kyoto treaty, which would have dramatic effects on our lives and on our economy, would be stupid.

And for a direct answer to your question on how much we have contributed to this, very little or not at all. It would be the height of arrogance to assume that in 100 years we have had enough effect to substantially contribute to the factors that cause the earth to warm and cool.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinestan
member
Registered: 09/16/00
Posts: 99
Loc: Sydney Australia
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #723757 - 07/04/02 11:24 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

I would have to disagree that most american's have a high standard of living. I've got the impression that there were like 1 million people living in poverty. But thats not to say that america isn't a great place. Hopefully one day we can say that everyone enjoys a high standard of living - some would say this is impossible but i call it a dream


--------------------
There is always a need for intoxication: China has
opium, Islam has hashish, the West has woman."
Andr? Malraux


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRonoS
DSYSB since '01
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/26/01
Posts: 16,247
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 11 days, 8 hours
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: stan]
    #724087 - 07/05/02 05:18 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

To blame human beings for causing it, or even speeding it up, without evidence that at least the majority of scientisits agree to, is just foolish.
You have got to be kidding me...don't even try to tell me that industrialization hasn't affected our planet for the worse. If you honestly believe what you said above then I would say that YOU are the one living in a dream world. You're views are obviously short-sighted with little or no care for future generations.

To sign on to a treaty, such as the Kyoto treaty, which would have dramatic effects on our lives and on our economy, would be stupid.
Yeah, how stupid to do something to benefit the entire planet in the long run, looks like we all dodged a bullet there huh?...whew, that was close.



--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"


Edited by Rono (07/05/02 05:20 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinepolitikill
journeyman

Registered: 05/23/02
Posts: 72
Loc: THC, Canada
Last seen: 15 years, 3 months
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #724114 - 07/05/02 06:13 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Hey Luvdemshrooms:
Who is the only country in the world convicted of terrorism at the World Court??
The USA, thank you, maybe Rono does have a point.

Do you not see a problem with the fact that you want everyone else in the world to be subject to laws on War Crimes except for the US??

Who blocked the last 5 UN Resolutions on Terrorism?
The US, because they cannot define terrorism without defining themselves. Granted Israel also voted against it because of the occupied territory (occupied against International Law). This also rasies the question of why did America not push Israel out of Syria, Egypt, and Jordan when they pushed Saddam out of Kuwait (the offical rationale for the removal of Iraqi troops was the fact that they had occupied a country against International Law)?
Not that pushing Saddam out of Kuwait was a bad thing (and Saddam is a butcher but also a butcher that the US endorsed for over 10 years).

How about the US's paricipation in the overthrow (in April of this year) of a democratically elected government in Venezula?
How does one justify that??

How about the US's support for the terror that has gripped Columbia for years with thousands of civilians dead??


My point is not that the US is all bad or the American people are bad. In fact, most Americans are really nice folks but there has to be a push from American citizens to change the way the executive of the US government operates and to make it more accountable. Not only to the rest of the world but to the Americans who it is supposed to represent


--------------------
Censorship: ahh, McCarthyism with a smiley face



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,234
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: I didn't write it, but I like it! [Re: Rono]
    #724141 - 07/05/02 06:42 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

"without evidence that at least the majority of scientisits agree to"

Re-read that part of my reply.

I do not personally have the scientific knowledge to know for sure. Among those who do (scientists) there is wide disagreement. I have read too much hype from "enviromentalists" to just take their word for it, as you seem so willing to do.

As for the treaty. You claim it would benefit the entire planet in the long run.... Do you have a crystal ball? Or perhaps space aliens came down and told you we are doomed?

Evidence is what we need, not theory. If agreement is reached.... fine, I'll believe it.

This does not mean I think we should do nothing. Less pollution is obviously a good thing. Better mileage for cars is a good thing. Less trash is a good thing. But.... to expect the world and the US to just say OK, we'll slash emmisions and who gives a fuck about the economy is.... stupid.

Try reading my responses in more depth. You seem to focus on the points which annoy you and as a result you only get half the point I'm attempting to make.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop: Portable Greenhouse

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Dominican Republic
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Baby_Hitler 3,957 62 11/10/05 02:00 PM
by psiclops
* Quake in Dominican Republic shakta 389 2 09/23/03 10:11 AM
by shakta
* Fox News: Palin didn't know Africa was a continent, not a country
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
supernovasky 3,970 125 11/10/08 08:50 PM
by zappaisgod
* Why didn't Saddam...
( 1 2 3 all )
grib 2,298 58 11/30/03 01:27 PM
by enimatpyrt
* Harry Reid: I Didn't Read The Prewar Intelligence Phred 889 17 11/21/05 12:42 PM
by afoaf
* Christ Didn't Celebrate Christmas bukkake 392 2 12/29/05 04:06 PM
by Catalysis
* Can you be arrested for expressing an argument against war?
( 1 2 3 all )
Prosgeopax 3,212 47 08/13/05 01:38 AM
by Silversoul
* You mean Saddam DIDN'T gas his own people? chodamunky 1,361 19 03/24/03 10:28 AM
by OctopusDr

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
3,696 topic views. 4 members, 2 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
FreeSpores.com
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.062 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 21 queries.