MOH or Nobel Peace Prize for Bush?

[CaptainCourtesy]

The American population didn't deceive itself. Also 70% of Americans at that time thought Saddam was behind 911 in some way.

Can we see a legitimite link on this statistic?

 

[Volker]

Actually, Volker and I decided that WE should get the Nobel Peace Prize for, as I said, 'turning a partisan, rubbishy thread into something decent and informative.' Please pay attention.

He made fun. Actually, I wouldn't mind if Mr. Bush gets the Price as long as he does not run in the same year like we do :mrgreen:

 

[Volker]

One of the funniest post ever at DP. Hats off to you, sir.

I think, it works this way on both sides of the pond :mrgreen:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

One thing for sure; a quick glance at the poll shows overwhelming support for Bush to receive both awards. My message has hit home.

I almost forgot this part. :dohThe 'overwhelming support' is one vote by...you guessed it...ptsdkid. No one else bothered to vote, showing how pointless and non-sensical this poll/thread is. If it wasn't for some good information about the Nobel Peace Prize itself, some good, light humor and fun, and some more serious debate going on, now, I would've sent this to the Basement loooong ago.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

He made fun. Actually, I wouldn't mind if Mr. Bush gets the Price as long as he does not run in the same year like we do :mrgreen:

True. We shouldn't have to share the cash with someone as lowly as 'President of the US.' I mean, WE'RE DP POSTERS, BY GOD!

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

OK, now you've got me confused, which is quite a feat.

In American politics and support, if you are rightist you are conservative and if you are leftist you are liberal. I think this has much to do with the way Americans define political conservatism and liberalism.
In Europe if you are rightist you can still break with the stereotype and be liberal right and you can be conservative left.

The best American example of this is Arnold Swartzenegger who is a republican, his policies are more to the right than to the center or left, but his politics are liberal not conservatives.

The norm in Europe is not that you are not automatically conservative or liberal if you are right or left. But in America you are usually both at the same time.

But I suppose this is reflected in the fact that in Europe we have more than a two party states, we have 9 for example in the Eu parliament, while the German parliament has dusins. Most European governments have 5-10 different parties, while the US is a two party state, divided by right=conservatives and left=liberals.

 

[The Mark]

www.Wikipedia.com - Conservatism in the United States.

As compared to what I believe European conservatism is.
www.Wikipedia.com - Conservatism

Judging from those explanations, I am not a conservative. Gotta go change my profile. :bolt

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

www.Wikipedia.com - Conservatism in the United States.

As compared to what I believe European conservatism is.
www.Wikipedia.com - Conservatism

Judging from those explanations, I am not a conservative. Gotta go change my profile. :bolt

I am center liberal, with most rightist influence, especially taxation issues, and making it easy for enterprise and businesses, yet I am socialist in many ways.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Oh, I knew, you would try something like this, it's still about this Grammy from the seventies, right? But hey, remember, I was the one who told the original songwriter, that this song is not good and if we give him $100 for it, it's more because we like his enthusiasm for music. I was the one who hired the people who actually sang this song and played the instruments. All you did was to create the show and negotiate with the record company. And really, your lip synchronity was not good, I was afraid the whole time, they go check and find this play back equipment, you know?

This is my Grammy :mrgreen:

No, I was referring to the Academy Award from the early '80's. I produced the film, hired the actors, found the location, handled the budget, found the locations, even cooked all the meals. And what did you do? Stood around looking pretty, and 'servicing' all the beautiful actresses. For that, you got to keep the Oscar. The statue is mine! :mrgreen:

 

[Volker]

OK, now you've got me confused, which is quite a feat.

Yes, I think it's because liberal means something different in Europe and America and it means something different in other places again.

In Europe liberals are not necessarly left, actually in Austria and Russia the biggest liberal parties are far right. In Germany there are two bigger liberal parties the way I see it, one of them is centrist, which is the Liberal Democratic Party, the other one claims to be left and not liberal, which is the Green Party.

Other liberal parties in Europe are center-right or center-left. Maximus is center-right.

Some of what you call patriotism in the US would probably be called be right-wing in Europe, maybe this is there the misunderstanding in the posts from Maximus comes from.

 

[Volker]

No, I was referring to the Academy Award from the early '80's. I produced the film, hired the actors, found the location, handled the budget, found the locations, even cooked all the meals. And what did you do? Stood around looking pretty, and 'servicing' all the beautiful actresses. For that, you got to keep the Oscar. The statue is mine! :mrgreen:

Hey, these were the eighties and all I did was to care for everyone feels fine at the set. This was the reason we got the Academy Award at all, the positive vibes and the fun, which were essential to this movie :mrgreen:

I miss these times, I had a really cool haircut :mrgreen:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

In American politics and support, if you are rightist you are conservative and if you are leftist you are liberal. I think this has much to do with the way Americans define political conservatism and liberalism.
In Europe if you are rightist you can still break with the stereotype and be liberal right and you can be conservative left.

The best American example of this is Arnold Swartzenegger who is a republican, his policies are more to the right than to the center or left, but his politics are liberal not conservatives.

The norm in Europe is not that you are not automatically conservative or liberal if you are right or left. But in America you are usually both at the same time.

But I suppose this is reflected in the fact that in Europe we have more than a two party states, we have 9 for example in the Eu parliament, while the German parliament has dusins. Most European governments have 5-10 different parties, while the US is a two party state, divided by right=conservatives and left=liberals.

Yes, I think it's because liberal means something different in Europe and America and it means something different in other places again.

In Europe liberals are not necessarly left, actually in Austria and Russia the biggest liberal parties are far right. In Germany there are two bigger liberal parties the way I see it, one of them is centrist, which is the Liberal Democratic Party, the other one claims to be left and not liberal, which is the Green Party.

Other liberal parties in Europe are center-right or center-left. Maximus is center-right.

Some of what you call patriotism in the US would probably be called be right-wing in Europe, maybe this is there the misunderstanding in the posts from Maximus comes from.

These are pretty good explanations. Either of you have some links that might help to explain some of the nuances of positions in Europe. Doesn't necessarily have to be generalized; something about any one country would also do.

I agree with one thing Maximus said. I think the fact that in America we, basically have a two-party system, whereas many countries in Europe have mulit-party systems yields a great misunderstanding between politics of both areas.

And in general, I don't have too much of a problem with debating Maximus, except that some posts are incredibly insulting and degrading to America, that it is difficult to not interpret them that way.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Hey, these were the eighties and all I did was to care for everyone feels fine at the set. This was the reason we got the Academy Award at all, the positive vibes and the fun, which were essential to this movie :mrgreen:

I miss these times, I had a really cool haircut :mrgreen:

I'm glad you remeber the '80's. :doh I do remember that haircut, though. I also remember the guy who wanted to buy it from you. Wasn't that Burt Reynolds? :mrgreen:

 

[Volker]

These are pretty good explanations. Either of you have some links that might help to explain some of the nuances of positions in Europe. Doesn't necessarily have to be generalized; something about any one country would also do.

This is the history of the liberal parties in Germany. As I said, I consider the Greens a liberal party, too, but wikipedia does not and probably most people in Germany do not.
Liberalism in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The National Liberal Party was right wing in my opinion, especially in the time before and during WWI. The German Democratic Party was left liberal, one of the signers to found this party was Albert Einstein.

The Free Democratic Party of today is more centrist and economically liberal or libertarian for Americans. There are still a lot of people with left wing ideas and a very small share of people with right wing ideas in this party, but the mainstream and the people who actually have a say there are centrists.

 

[Volker]

I'm glad you remeber the '80's. :doh I do remember that haircut, though. I also remember the guy who wanted to buy it from you. Wasn't that Burt Reynolds? :mrgreen:

It was Don Johnson :mrgreen:

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

These are pretty good explanations. Either of you have some links that might help to explain some of the nuances of positions in Europe. Doesn't necessarily have to be generalized; something about any one country would also do.

I agree with one thing Maximus said. I think the fact that in America we, basically have a two-party system, whereas many countries in Europe have mulit-party systems yields a great misunderstanding between politics of both areas.

And in general, I don't have too much of a problem with debating Maximus, except that some posts are incredibly insulting and degrading to America, that it is difficult to not interpret them that way.

I am not anti-American, I like Americans, but like most Europeans I hate your leaderships and I am starting to see some problems with your political system and governments.
Personally I dont like American conservatives that much, because they tend to be completely different from me, they have no socialist symphaty and their politics seem to be extreme right wing, patriotic and blind to what I like to call the "real of reality". Right wing Americans are always conservative, thus they completely differ from me, since I am liberal and promote the future rather than the past. I am centrist in views mostly, but Americans probably find me leftist since I support liberal policies.

So they are just different from me in almost every way, except for big businesses, which is real fascism. Corporatism is fascism, and its so funny to see these people call arabs and muslims fascist, when they are infact the one who are partly fascist.

I dont want the society to be ruled by corporations, but I want society to adapt to corporations and give them an easy time, since corporations are basically what is keeping this world alive.

Iran isnt a fascist regime its a totalitarian democratic republic, the US is a democratic two party republic.
Germany is a multistate democratic federation, France is a democratic multiparty republic.

 

[Volker]

Right wing Americans are always conservative, thus they completely differ from me, since I am liberal and promote the future rather than the past.

Actually, I see a lot of right wing Americans on DP which call themselves liberals. Some even think, they are the only true liberals. A lot of politicians in the Democratic Party call themselves liberals, even often they are often more right wing than their Republican competitor.

I am centrist in views mostly, but Americans probably find me leftist since I support liberal policies.

What I don't understand is how one can be liberal and socialist at the same time. There are a lot of contradictions in how these two currents see things. Sure liberals and socialists can cooperate about topics or they can build coalitions, but they stand for different ideas about how a society should work.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Once again, Volker and Maximus have given me an education on European politics and quite a bit to research and investigate. Knowledge is always a good thing, to me. Maximus, you've explained yourself better in your last post around your position and beliefs. Be aware that some of your comments come out overgeneralized, hence some of the aggression you see. I respect how you have just presented yourself.

 

[ptsdkid]

Once again, Volker and Maximus have given me an education on European politics and quite a bit to research and investigate. Knowledge is always a good thing, to me. Maximus, you've explained yourself better in your last post around your position and beliefs. Be aware that some of your comments come out overgeneralized, hence some of the aggression you see. I respect how you have just presented yourself.

***Do you think it possible that you fine gentlemen start shifting the failed European liberal/socialist politics back to giving the Conservative George Bush the deserved accolades and consideration for the MOH and the Nobel Peace Prize? Isn't that part of your job, Capt Courtesy?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

What I don't understand is how one can be liberal and socialist at the same time. There are a lot of contradictions in how these two currents see things. Sure liberals and socialists can cooperate about topics or they can build coalitions, but they stand for different ideas about how a society should work.

Wrong, the ideas of a liberal always change, thus liberal, he dont have any rules , he just goes for the optimal solution, be it traditonal or ultra reformist.

I am only socialist in the wat that I think the planet have enough resources to supply everyone with at least food, health and education. Beoynd that point, I am not really that socialist. I admire the system of social welfare, but its ultimately flawed in its current function, if this system is to be maintained there need to be hard guidlines to whom can take advantage of it.

.handicapped people that have no chance of working
.handicapped people who need help
.former government workers that became disabled in any way, not small disabilities but large ones. If they can still use a computer they can still work.
.psychologically crazy people should have the right to treatment, they should be encouraged treatment and encouraged to work after.
.people who cannot work for some other reason. STRICT.
.homeless work camps, where homeless people get shelter and a piece of food and limited money to build up their life again, against hard work.
.criminals should be forced to do labour, inmates of prisons.
.everyone should be entitled to education.

Anyone who would want to receive welfare(in Europe/EU) should have lived in a current EU state for at least 25 years or have been born here to be entitled to welfare at all. If he has the other limits apply, if he hasnt, he need not apply.
If you want to receive welfare in the Netherlands for example you would have to be eligable through the first rule, but would have had to have lived in the state you apply in(ntherlands) for at least 1 year.

Beyond Europe, I think it is a must for societies, especially developed ones to provide free education and food for people across the globe who cannot afford this. A country socialist program. This should follow strict guidelines to build that country up from the inside out, starting with nutrition, health and education, this could be traded against work for example. Work could be for example the building of necessary infrastructure to carry the whole program to step 2 and sustainability.

Beoynd this I am not socialist, just liberal..

I belive in justice for all, not just Europeans and Americans. Every single human has the right to food(incl water) and education...

The cost would be aproximately 1-3/10th of annual world military expenditure.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

***Do you think it possible that you fine gentlemen start shifting the failed European liberal/socialist politics back to giving the Conservative George Bush the deserved accolades and consideration for the MOH and the Nobel Peace Prize? Isn't that part of your job, Capt Courtesy?

The poll and this thread should immidiately have been thrown to the basement.. Where is the "other" option in the poll, or the "none of these" or "handed his own death sentance"?

 

[ptsdkid]

.

***Socialism and or National Socialism as seen in Nazi Germany has failed everywhere it was tried. The Communist Soviet Union is another fine example of failed Socialism. Socialism is of course the severely handicapped child of true Red Communism. You live in Europe yet you have failed to see the dying of your Continent due to a destructive Socialized ideology. You do know that because of Europe's big government handouts (especially to the influx of Muslims under their own Sharia law)--that you have the lowest birthrate in the world per capita of population. And that birthrate keeps sinking as we speak. You speak of helping all these handicap and poor groupings of people, but you fasil to realize that there are fewer and fewer eligible working people left in Europe to pay the bills to support these so-called entitled peoples. You need to get on the Capitalist band wagon before you and your countrymen go down into the dustbin of history.

 

[Volker]

Beyond this I am not socialist, just liberal.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but so far you are not even in the same solar system like a socialist.

All these points are liberal.

I belive in justice for all, not just Europeans and Americans. Every single human has the right to food(incl water) and education...

The cost would be aproximately 1-3/10th of annual world military expenditure.

This is actually the first point that socialists can subscribe to in my opinion.

 

[MSgt]

This is a funny thread. Bit rediculous, but funny.

1) The Medal of Honor: Established in 1863. This is awarded by the President of the United States on behalf of Congress. It is for individuals who distinguishe themselves conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States.

2) Nobel Peace Prize: The selection of Nobel Peace Prize winners sometimes causes controversy, as the list of winners includes people who formerly used violent methods of problem-solving, but then later made exceptional concessions to non-violence in the attempt to achieve peace.



Nobody that sits behind a desk far from the savagery of battle should ever be considered for such an honor as to be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. And I could argue all day about how this war in Iraq is more of a preventive step against a future large scale civilizational war rather than a pre-emptive step to avoid further attack (which was not coming from Iraq, people), but the event is still a violent episode. It is hardly a "non-violent attempt to achieve peace."


Any other choices to choose from?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

.

***Socialism and or National Socialism as seen in Nazi Germany has failed everywhere it was tried. The Communist Soviet Union is another fine example of failed Socialism. Socialism is of course the severely handicapped child of true Red Communism. You live in Europe yet you have failed to see the dying of your Continent due to a destructive Socialized ideology. You do know that because of Europe's big government handouts (especially to the influx of Muslims under their own Sharia law)--that you have the lowest birthrate in the world per capita of population. And that birthrate keeps sinking as we speak. You speak of helping all these handicap and poor groupings of people, but you fasil to realize that there are fewer and fewer eligible working people left in Europe to pay the bills to support these so-called entitled peoples. You need to get on the Capitalist band wagon before you and your countrymen go down into the dustbin of history.

Socialism in Europe has worked fine. Since the world war, when Western Europe had half the economy of the US, we have had a successfull social system, and the western European economy is now the same size as that of the US. Hardly unsuccessfull.

Europe have a much lower rate of homicide, murder, violence and rape than that of the US, which underpin the success of the social system.
Yet Europe are top of the notch on Forbes billionair lists which means there is nothing that prevents Europeans from being enourmously rich. In fact, Europe is not a socialist system, but a capitalist-socialist system with the best from each. Nothing is perfect, nor is European social system, which many Europeans think should be much toughter, me among many.

I want that people to be eliable for welfare for example have to have lived in a the EU for 25 years, or one or more of the current EU states for the same duration. In addition everyone born in Europe should automatically be eligable. While if you are eligable and want to receive welfare in France for example you should have had to lived there for at least 1 year, or else you have to take welfare in the state you lived the last year. To be eligable in any country one of the two first rules must be met, while at the same time the one year law.

Anyways, its just a matter of time before the European Union grabs a hold of and reform the European social and welfare system to these standards or even better standards, so that people cannot come to Europe and take advantage of the welfare system, like I personally have seen many arabs do.