Guard Dog Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 *ear piercing shriek of animalistic primaeval fury and frustration* Well, we did. If I pretend to agree with you that we went in for the wrong reasons can you pretend to tell me WHAT BLOODY DIFFERENCE IT MAKES NOW? PLEASE......lock thread.....insanity MUST be stopped! "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveThaiBinh Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 PLEASE......lock thread.....insanity MUST be stopped! If you can survive another 50 posts, I can lock it for length. "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 If I pretend to agree with you that we went in for the wrong reasons can you pretend to tell me WHAT BLOODY DIFFERENCE IT MAKES NOW? The difference would be that it would give us justification to bug off and leave. Let the Iraqis determine the fate of Iraq. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 The market would be free, but the government would still be totalitarian (corporatism? fascism? A bit hard to define...) that's the final part of communism that i was referring to. if they don't dump the totalitarian gov't, i doubt their growth will continue at this pace. a free exchange of ideas is required to fully support free market economics, and they do not have that. they can't even publish news articles about tianamen square. with a high emphasis on the common chinese identity, which will breed a dangerous form of nationalism. Russia is following China, AND still be independent on oil. I wouldn't be surprised if they will form stronger ties in the future than before. Russia + China would be an interesting counterweight to western democracy in a geopolitical sense. Exciting times ahead folks! i suppose you mean "dependent on oil?" either way, they both have some issues they cannot overcome with their heavy handed governments. i'm guessing we'll see civil war in both sometime in the future. as the middle class in china grows, it will want more freedom. russia's just, well, a mess. i feel sorry for them. they got their long awaited freedom only to have improper management by the government. they didn't know how to deal with it and things spun out of control. corruption ruled. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 If you can survive another 50 posts, I can lock it for length. i'll do my part. it's almost worth keeping just to see GD keep coming back. it's like "watch this box (by yourself) and don't press the big red button, it's bad. i'll be back in an hour." the big red button will get pressed 50 times before you return. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meshugger Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 The market would be free, but the government would still be totalitarian (corporatism? fascism? A bit hard to define...) that's the final part of communism that i was referring to. if they don't dump the totalitarian gov't, i doubt their growth will continue at this pace. a free exchange of ideas is required to fully support free market economics, and they do not have that. they can't even publish news articles about tianamen square. with a high emphasis on the common chinese identity, which will breed a dangerous form of nationalism. Russia is following China, AND still be independent on oil. I wouldn't be surprised if they will form stronger ties in the future than before. Russia + China would be an interesting counterweight to western democracy in a geopolitical sense. Exciting times ahead folks! i suppose you mean "dependent on oil?" either way, they both have some issues they cannot overcome with their heavy handed governments. i'm guessing we'll see civil war in both sometime in the future. as the middle class in china grows, it will want more freedom. russia's just, well, a mess. i feel sorry for them. they got their long awaited freedom only to have improper management by the government. they didn't know how to deal with it and things spun out of control. corruption ruled. taks Wow there, slow down a minute. That's more like within next 50 years, i was talking about next 25 years And sorry for the obvious mistake about the oil, my "engrish"-skills weren't working "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Wow there, slow down a minute. That's more like within next 50 years, i was talking about next 25 years And sorry for the obvious mistake about the oil, my "engrish"-skills weren't working i don't disagree. i was only pointing out that china, given the current leadership, will eventually reach a limit to their growth. they may reach us in terms of economic strength in the mean time (though not in per capita given their huge population), and maybe even military strength, but the democracies of the world will likely continue to grow, again outstripping china in short order. i.e., economic reforms are necessary, but not sufficient. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted July 19, 2007 Author Share Posted July 19, 2007 OK back to impeachment. Hypothetically: Whether we can or not. If there is or was good conclusive evidence that gives us reason to impeach, should we? Would impeaching GWB make things worse in the long run? I've heard many people say it is a bad idea, we should not because the democrats love GWB due to his negative image it brings to the Republican party, thus giving the democrats a leg up. I can see this being a moral dilemma. Setting justice aside for one person for anothers' political advantage. I am iffy about this, it sends an image that the higher you on the ladder the more you can get away with crime. Which is a sad reality. If Bush or any president does something completely illegal, and causes pain and suffering they should be brought to justice and made an example. I know Bush hasn't been caught, I'm just stating this in general. Not prosecuting somebody who broke the law for your own benefit is wrong i believe. What do you guys think? Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now