The Future will be ruled by those who have the Guns. - Page 2 - Political Forum

Locke9-05 · #11 (**permalink**) 05-06-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bododie

"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

No, that was long ago. It's time to ask what my country is doing for me and the millions of American people who pay taxes so that our government can give it to other countries.

I know what my country wants from me.
The only thing my country wants me to do is pay taxes and then die.

What an astonishingly unpatriotic view. First of all, that's completely utterly, and even trollishly off-topic. To drag a quote from my signature into this topic's discussion as if it's somehow relevant--when in reality it is not--is very low-class. I've only ever seen such an absurd and irrelevant association "tactic" used once before, and it didn't work very well that time either. Secondly, John F. Kennedy's speech applied to the ideal of this nation and the people as a collective whole, not the government. To twist John F Kennedy's words and act as though he was encouraging the people to follow the government and obey the government is a shallow argument indeed. John F. Kennedy's words reflected the collectivist principle of America as an ideal and nation, not a government. It's too bad that selfish, individualist, anti-patriotic ideas--really nothing more than anarchical in nature--get in the way of the true realization between a great speech and a great quote, one that will always be applicable to this nation as an ideal and collectivist principle.

jackson_8610 · #12 (**permalink**) 05-29-2008, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by discoman

As I look at the ever increasing chaos that continues to grip the civilized world.
I have come to the conclusion that things will progressively get worse. I see a time in the not to distant future,where America will be constantly invaded by multiple armed extremist factions from other destitute parts of the globe...

The assault has already begun.Sept 11, was just a appetizer event, there is much more horrific events that have not yet been implemented on our soil.Will we all be ready?.

I come to precisely the opposite conclusion based upon our policy since
9/11. Any armed extremist factions that may have considered invading America before 9/11, now knows that we will go ape sh#t postal on their ass if they do. Many extremist are willing to die to FURTHER their cause. Only the die hard muslim extremist are willing to die for their cause regardless of whether their death furthers their cause. And even most of them dont want to die a death that damages their cause.

catawba · #13 (**permalink**) 05-29-2008, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackson_8610

I come to precisely the opposite conclusion based upon our policy since
9/11. Any armed extremist factions that may have considered invading America before 9/11, now knows that we will go ape sh#t postal on their ass if they do. Many extremist are willing to die to FURTHER their cause. Only the die hard muslim extremist are willing to die for their cause regardless of whether their death furthers their cause. And even most of them dont want to die a death that damages their cause.

I couldn't disagree more. After the tragedy of 9/11, when we had the support of the world on our side would have been the time to enlist worldwide support for addressing the terrorism problems throughout the world together. Instead, the neocons, led by cowboy Bush, use it as an excuse to invade defenseless Iraq to try to establish a stronghold in Iraq to feed our greed for their oil supplies there, thereby turning good will to hate which can only breed more terrorism. It makes me come back to the theory that humans are possibly too stupid to survive as a species. Perhaps a paramecium, or whatever else is the dominant species next will do a better job. They sure couldn't do much worse!

jackson_8610 · #14 (**permalink**) 05-29-2008, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catawba

[color="Navy"]I couldn't disagree more. After the tragedy of 9/11, when we had the support of the world on our side would have been the time to enlist worldwide support for addressing the terrorism problems throughout the world together.

"addressing the terrorism problems"??? What does that mean? Usually for the left, that entails doing as the terrorist wish in hopes that they will not attack again. Dont need worldwide support to do that.

catawba · #15 (**permalink**) 05-29-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackson_8610

"addressing the terrorism problems"??? What does that mean? Usually for the left, that entails doing as the terrorist wish in hopes that they will not attack again. Dont need worldwide support to do that.

We could have had the whole world, including the people in the Arab states who supported us after the terrorists attack, help us find and imprison the terrorists responsible, rather than riding off on our high horse killing hundreds of thousand of innocent civilians who had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks, and while there set up shop to take their oil.

Its easy to see how well that approach worked out!

jackson_8610 · #16 (**permalink**) 05-30-2008, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catawba

[color="Navy"]We could have had the whole world, including the people in the Arab states who supported us after the terrorists attack,

After the terrorist attack the people in the Arab states were to busy celebrating to be of any help.

Slartibartfas · #17 (**permalink**) 05-30-2008, 08:51 AM

Quote:

We must make a choice to arm ourselves now, for what is coming in the not to distant future, or accept what ever these armed factions want to do to us. I suggest we arm our selves now.

Thats militaristic paranoia at its best.

Even if there should be eventually some evil foreign force that tries to conquer the US and really has a good chance to beat your army. You still have time to army your citizens when such a scenario is right in front of you.

There are several argumetns in favor of arms. The one that says that the people have to be armed in order to turn down a potential occupation of the US is probably the weakest of them.

discoman · #18 (**permalink**) 05-30-2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

Thats militaristic paranoia at its best.

Even if there should be eventually some evil foreign force that tries to conquer the US and really has a good chance to beat your army. You still have time to army your citizens when such a scenario is right in front of you.

There are several argumetns in favor of arms. The one that says that the people have to be armed in order to turn down a potential occupation of the US is probably the weakest of them.

I would not call it "Milltaristic Paranoia at its best" ,I would call it preparing your self for a situation that may materialize at some point in the not to distant future.

Slartibartfas · #19 (**permalink**) 05-30-2008, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by discoman

I would not call it "Milltaristic Paranoia at its best" ,I would call it preparing your self for a situation that may materialize at some point in the not to distant future.

Why wasting money for something that is highly unrealistic if you can wait until it becomes a proven threat? Its not like an invasion plus the break down of the US army could happen over night. There would be always enough time left for arming the citizens in case of emergency.

Before investing in heavy arms for the paranoia of fighting an foreign enemy on the own soil Americans should better invest in more solid houses to counter natural threats like earthquakes or hurricans. Those are far more realistic threats. If you live in risk zones of such kind your money would be better invested in that.

FreeFallin · #20 (**permalink**) 05-30-2008, 03:34 PM

this makes no sense. Why is it in civil liberities and not conspiricy theorys. Its all speculation, you have no idea what the future will be like. just because we have an oil crisis doesnt mean the world will end with guns