The Pope is dying

[draakh_kimera]

Haven't heard of that one...Did he really say that regarding the other countries, or as an inspiring speech though?

[Roger the Sith]

Bush's 9/20/01 speech or here en Espa

[Lucius]

I only know it was a speech I saw on TV, I can only assume he and his administration supports what he says in public.

[mastaGAW]

Gee... I don't know...  Why don't you ask a catholic? 

 

You comparing the pope to stalin?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

These seats of power are all the same to me.

 

As for what is there to compare between these two: Like with the much mourned Soviet Premiere, there will be another Pope along before long, and then all the Catholics around the world can sing songs about how that new guy is better than the last one.

 

Unlike Stalin, Karol Wojtyla may not have killed people with his bare hands (or if he did, it has been well covered up), but you cannot deny that his position as the head of the Roman temple/bank is entirely without blame concerning poverty and political chaos in the third world Catholic states.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Its the only stable instituion that tries to counter those blights in most third world nations of latin America and Africa. I can't think of any other religion that consistently does. Maybe Buddists. The thing the pope did wrong I believe was his stance condoms which wasn't helping Aids in Africa. He should have known better being from a third world country himself. If an African becomes the next pope that will probaly change. JP did a lot more than most other world leaders in trying to solve poverty.

[draakh_kimera]

...we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.  Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.  (Applause.)  From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.

 

Well, I'm guessing he's referring to counrtries like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran in this particular instance, and not without cause either. If that is the case, then I think he had full right to do so. The governments of those countries before their invasion (well, not Iran, cause no invasion.. yet..) almost undoubtedly had some form of contact with terrorist networks.

[Roger the Sith]

Its the only stable instituion that tries to counter those blights in most third world nations of latin America and Africa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No it isn't.

 

 

He should have known better being from a third world country himself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are about to get attacked by angry Polacks!

 

 

The thing the pope did wrong...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That has been the point all along!

 

They are in

[SteveThaiBinh]

Its the only stable instituion that tries to counter those blights in most third world nations of latin America and Africa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No it isn't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The record of the World Bank in fighting poverty is patchy at best. Just to give an example, they went to Viet Nam and advised the government to grow more coffee for export, in order to earn dollars to invest. Problem was, they advised a dozen other countries to do exactly the same thing. The result was a massive global surplus of coffee, the price collapsed, the farmers sank further into poverty, the coffee multinationals didn't bother to reduce the prices for consumers, and hey presto, their profits soared.

 

And now we have Paul Wolfowitz to contend with.

 

He should have known better being from a third world country himself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Poland is not and never was a third world (developing) country. It was a second world country, and now is probably part of the first (developed) world.

 

That has been the point all along!

 

They are in

[Roger the Sith]

The record of the World Bank in fighting poverty is patchy at best.  Just to give an example, they went to Viet Nam and advised the government to grow more coffee for export, in order to earn dollars to invest.  Problem was, they advised a dozen other countries to do exactly the same thing.  The result was a massive global surplus of coffee, the price collapsed, the farmers sank further into poverty, the coffee multinationals didn't bother to reduce the prices for consumers, and hey presto, their profits soared.

 

And now we have Paul Wolfowitz to contend with.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The World Bank is more complicated than that. Their own words: Not a bank, but rather a specialized agency. It works on a political level out of Washington DC in accordance with other "similar organizations" -- UN, US, EU, NATO, etc. (light blue insignias with stars or globes).

 

You cannot eliminate poverty... and they know it. :ph34r:

 

They can still have an organization, though. Now let us end this discussion and get back to the Popes before we get raided by CIA.

 

 

And do not worry about Wolfowitz too much -- they are just exchanging their Wolfs.

[LoneWolf16]

You're right, buddy! I'm from Norway...

 

By the way, I just now noticed LoneWolf16's reply to me, which I would like to quote:

 

Our (by which I mean the U.S.) foreign policy is absolute rubbish. Pure, unadulterated bull**** in a nice shiny, pre-owned, luxury, one-of-a-kind, all-american package. Our political leaders are complete morons....which hasn't really changed for the better part of a century or two...well, most of them are, though there's a few good, seemingly intelligent ones mixed in here and there.

 

Yes, were way too young to have the power we do...our recent actions being excellent evidence of that. Like an eight-year-old suddenly given dominion over time and space, it just doesn't work out.

 

Very well said. And he's American, WithTeeth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yay, quoted twice on the same thread. My day has been made :D . Sadly enough.

 

Maybe, but they have done a lot better than many eight year olds would have.

 

I dont think religion should be involved in policy. But if you were honest then it's just too big a part of life and morality not to be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True, it's more like 10, or 11 . I agree with you about religion being a large part of people's lives, but I'm honest, and fully capable of crafting a political system devoid of all but the barest religious influences...keeping just the basic moral principles, of course.

[DarthWeevil]

Ok.. you'll have to excuse me if any of this is horribly misinformed because I didn't study history in the last 15 years. Nor do i claim to be confident on matters of politics...

 

It never stops does it?  who formulated the idea of the league of nations and the UN? that is acredited to the United states.

Don't forget Neville Chamberlain and the British government. or indeed every other government that formed part of the LoN and then the UN.

I would argue that any one nation trying to take credit for such an endeavor is counterproductive. its not a game of oneupmanship.

 

Much of history is in books. you did not inherit it, you earned it through learning. because you are eurpean does not mean that you have more history then I. 

conversely much of American history is european, considering at its roots much of American society was formed from European nationals. so perhaps we can teach America something too.

 

Secondly you mention history books. I refer you to my previous post on religious doctrinous texts. the difference here.. every country teaches slightly different things based on their perspective of world history. Its not as simplistic as that old phrase 'history is written by the victors in war'. what actually happens is much more insidious.

 

I was horrified and somewhat shocked to read that American history in some states teaches the irish potato famine was an English plot to eradicate the Irish. But then i got thinking. For all I know that may be true, and our history books may simply be covering it up. the problem is... we'll never truly know about some things.

 

I know the US is not the best and its dangerous in thinking so. nationalism lead to ww1 and ww2. what im trying to say is look at the United states as a partener a brother, not s child. equal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally... I fear the current American government and its policies.

Not the people. Most of the Americans I've met on an individual level seem fine. I can't speak for those who stay at home. Its the fundamentals that seem to be calling the shots, and to be fair.. they wouldn't be there if they weren't popular.

 

it scares me when i read how they are attempting to take hold of the morals of the country. its almost as if they are trying to bind the country together against a common enemy. It seems the US is a nation in fear at present. and fear is not a good basis on which to make decisions on an international level.

 

But finally.

 

How the hell did we get onto US domestic and foreign policy?

[Rosbjerg]

How the hell did we get onto US domestic and foreign policy?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

well a couple of pages ago we were discussing the difference between the male and female brain (in size) .. and the genders respective capabilities in regards to leading a nation!

[Rhomal]

As a former catholic while I did not agree with many of his stances (and one of the reasons I left the church) such as birth control, abortion and sex before marriage I do agree with those above. Those political differences aside he did some amazing work and did what he felt was best for the world.

 

My only issue with him as a person was his either ignorance or mostly ignoring the church child abuse issues here in the US.

[WITHTEETH]

I agree to most of what you say Darthweevil. democracy is morphing(good or bad) im just trying to get Europe to change their perspective, because its not making the world a better place. look at how the conservatives and the liberals treat eachother. they hate eachother so much that they many times don't want to agree on anything even if it makes sense. people in general are good (in my opinion) and i its bad to have a miconception like this.

[Jellybelly]

The World Bank is hardly a humanitarian organization. The mere thought is ridiculous. Next you'll probably be listing the International Monetary Fund as do-gooders for the poor in the world? These people are one of the main reasons "the third world" is a term today.

 

I'd rather give credit to Medecin sans Frontieres in this context. Those people are really selfless.

 

And seriously, how could the potatoe famine be orchestrated by the English? Seems pretty contrived to me. But then again, many states in the US tech Creation instead of evolution. That's about as un-scientific as it gets. And the two aren't even mutually exclusive. It's fundamentalism, that's what it is...

[Roger the Sith]

The World Bank is hardly a humanitarian organization. The mere thought is ridiculous. Next you'll be probably listing the International Monetary Fund as do-gooders for the poor in the world? These people are one of the main reasons "the third world" is a term today.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shhh! :ph34r:

 

That is the best you get in a world run by a monopoly.

[DarthWeevil]

people in general are good  (in my opinion) and i its bad to have a miconception like this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not about good and evil, to be honest most people have a relatively acceptable set of morals, but the problem is too many are not confident enough to make their own life decisions. that's the problem. And in fact we are raised to be that way. Every step of the way we are taught to listen to our elders, respect authority. Unquestioningly. Its extremely hard for some to break that. As a result it only takes a handful of bad apples. oooh lets say power hungry politicians.

 

and the whole thing goes to pot

[WITHTEETH]

people in general are good  (in my opinion) and i its bad to have a miconception like this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not about good and evil, to be honest most people have a relatively acceptable set of morals, but the problem is too many are not confident enough to make their own life decisions. that's the problem. And in fact we are raised to be that way. Every step of the way we are taught to listen to our elders, respect authority. Unquestioningly. Its extremely hard for some to break that. As a result it only takes a handful of bad apples. oooh lets say power hungry politicians.

 

and the whole thing goes to pot

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree again.

Education lights the path.

[DarthWeevil]

You know.. forma certain point of view. Democracy=Mob rule.

 

And you can bet there's political minds out there that use it in such a way

[SteveThaiBinh]

And seriously, how could the potatoe famine be orchestrated by the English? Seems pretty contrived to me. But then again, many states in the US tech Creation instead of evolution. That's about as un-scientific as it gets. And the two aren't even mutually exclusive. It's fundamentalism, that's what it is...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While India was under British colonial rule, it experienced regular famines every few years. Since India became an independent democracy, there hasn't been a single famine. Coincidence? I think not.

 

Governments can't change the weather or geography, but they can choose to organise effective relief in hard times, if they wish. Had an equivalent poor harvest taken place in England, the government would have intervened to help people because their votes and goodwill might be important. The British government simply didn't care about the Irish 'peasants'.

 

No modern liberal democracy has ever experienced a famine. It's one of the major arguments put forward for spreading democracy around the world. I hate to hear it twisted in mouths of neo-conservatives, though.

[DarthWeevil]

I agree again.

Education lights the path.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Long as we're telling our kids the truth.

 

or alternatively, they should just put me in charge of the world. everything would be so much better.

[DarthWeevil]

While India was under British colonial rule, it experienced regular famines every few years.  Since India became an independent democracy, there hasn't been a single famine.  Coincidence?  I think not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But what could they possibly hope to achive by doing that? the point of expanding territory is not to destroy the resources that they possess, but to claim them. Maybe if some scheming mastermind wanted to they may have caused famines to weaken the population in order to conquer them, but why do so when already in occupation?

 

and to my knowledge understanding of disease was still very rudimentary during these times..

 

biological warfare in the 19th century?

[Jellybelly]

While India was under British colonial rule, it experienced regular famines every few years.  Since India became an independent democracy, there hasn't been a single famine.  Coincidence?  I think not.

 

Governments can't change the weather or geography, but they can choose to organise effective relief in hard times, if they wish.  Had an equivalent poor harvest taken place in England, the government would have intervened to help people because their votes and goodwill might be important.  The British government simply didn't care about the Irish 'peasants'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To not organize a relief effort is in no way the same as "creating the famine to exterminate the Irish", which is what I understood by the premise supposition.

[SteveThaiBinh]

But what could they possibly hope to achive by doing that? the point of expanding territory is not to destroy the resources that they possess, but to claim them. Maybe if some scheming mastermind wanted to they may have caused famines to weaken the population in order to conquer them, but why do so when already in occupation?

 

and to my knowledge understanding of disease was still very rudimentary during these times..

 

biological warfare in the 19th century?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I doubt they intended anything. They just didn't care enough to do anything about it. The colonial administration doesn't engineer the crop failure, it just fails to act to save lives.

 

Part of the colonial mindset is that the 'natives' are used to death and don't feel about it the same way 'we' do. Though thousands of deaths would be a terrible thing in England, in India it's somehow 'normal'.

[LoneWolf16]

But what could they possibly hope to achive by doing that? the point of expanding territory is not to destroy the resources that they possess, but to claim them. Maybe if some scheming mastermind wanted to they may have caused famines to weaken the population in order to conquer them, but why do so when already in occupation?

 

and to my knowledge understanding of disease was still very rudimentary during these times..

 

biological warfare in the 19th century?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I doubt they intended anything. They just didn't care enough to do anything about it. The colonial administration doesn't engineer the crop failure, it just fails to act to save lives.

 

Part of the colonial mindset is that the 'natives' are used to death and don't feel about it the same way 'we' do. Though thousands of deaths would be a terrible thing in England, in India it's somehow 'normal'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So very, very sad, yet unfortunately, accurate.

[Nur Ab Sal]

It is amazing how this discussion is evolving. From compassion to a dying pope to american foreign policy and world bank parasites.