First, we start by understanding that intellectually honest people dont start out with a conclusion then try to build a case around that....of nations negatively affected by socialism. I need to build a platform that indicates as proof to the naive as to why socialism is a failed political concept.
...of nations negatively affected by socialism. I need to build a platform that indicates as proof to the naive as to why socialism is a failed political concept.
And what does this have to do with Europe?
Everyone knows the entirety of the European continent is socialist.
Ahh, so the Conservative governments of the UK, France, Germany, Denmark and so on are in reality commies?
Of course, they're European, they have to be.
ya of course...
But.. considering that most American's, Canadians, and Aussies are descendent of Europeans, then that must mean that they too are commies.. after all being a commie must be inherited since we in Europe are commies.. now and 40 years ago.
Yeah, now you're getting it. :mrgreen:
Our country used to be so much better when we still had 14 hr workdays and child labour...
...of nations negatively affected by socialism. I need to build a platform that indicates as proof to the naive as to why socialism is a failed political concept.
Can you explain in more detail what "official policies" and who is "the self-declared "leader of the free world" " you are referring to? Because it looks like you are referring to Obama.".... But soon, he got very sad and explained that he believes this victory may have been in vein, because the self-declared "leader of the free world" does exactly the same today, as official policy, what his people went on the streets against.
Can you explain in more detail what "official policies" and who is "the self-declared "leader of the free world" " you are referring to? Because it looks like you are referring to Obama.
I mean America and the American governments, regardless if the President is named Clinton, Bush or Obama. Clinton has set the first precedents for this official policy, Bush extremely expanded it and Obama failed to end it entirely. I mean the policy of extralegal detention, denial of fair trials for mere suspects, "harsh interrogations" that everybody in the world except of American Republicans consider torture.
Don't get me wrong, I like America. America has made great historical achievements, and also thanks to America among others, I can live in freedom today. But these policies are just wrong, and they fly in the face of every claim that was ever made from American side to defend freedom and human rights. You can't just give up your most basic values, even if that's just limited and temporary, just because you are afraid and they have become inconvenient. The little extra security is not worth it, either you respect these values or you aren't free. Risk is the price of freedom.
Because of these policies that were excessively expanded in the Patriot Act, I think Bush is not a President that deserves any credit, he has played away any moral credit he ever had, and severely damaged America in the process. I hoped for a change under Obama, but except for a few cosmetic changes, this "change" did not take place. And the hypocrites who now go on the streets against Obama are just too greedy to pay taxes, they don't even care about these blatant human right violations, they don't even know what "big government" really is. It's sad, really.
Many people in my country have very recent vivid first-hand memories of a "big government" that is not just a little inconvenient, because taxes are too high -- no, they remember a government so big that it would imprison people at free will, deny them fair trials and torture them. That's what socialism is, that's what tyranny is, that's what "big government" is.
If you want to know why especially Bush and the Republicans are so unpopular in Europe, look at this. That's why. They remind us too much of our experience with socialism.
And at the end of the day, that's all that matters, right?No loss of freedoms for Americans.
And at the end of the day, that's all that matters, right?
They are enemy combatants. They are not soldiers, caught as POWs. They are not citizens or illegal aliens. As such they have no "right to trial', there is no problem detaining them, "harsh interrogation" can be used. Simple. No loss of freedoms for Americans.
I was under the impression that the term is "human rights". Human. But my fault -- apparently, I was under the wrong impression that all people regardless of nationality have inalienable rights and that America's claims to fight for the good are more than just empty rhetoric.
Good luck winning hearts and minds, and setting a good example others look up to and are willing to emulate.
Indeed. If there were loss of freedoms for Americans, he may have a point - but there is not.
Sure, human rights....unless you are caught on the battlefield, in no uniform, waging combat against American or native forces.
The CIA has kidnapped German citizens from the streets in Germany, then detained and tortured them, instead of going the way of invoking the authorities in the free, democratic republican constitutional German state. German authorities had no choice but issuing arrest warrents against the according CIA members for kidnapping and other charges. But America protects these thugs and refuses to deliver them.
Is that what you had in mind when you liberated my country from Nazist dictatorship, teaching us what a Constitution is, what fair trials are and what freedom is?
Defending freedom can be ugly sometimes.