Gothic.net Community - View Single Post

CptSternn · 03-19-2007, 04:19 AM

Art -

It sounds scary, but in yer last few posts, I agree with a few things you said.

First off, I think people would value their citizenship more if they participated in the government. I don't think it should be mandatory, but do feel more should be done to get people involved BEFORE a crisis which divides a country gets to the point where people feel the HAVE to be involved due to the mismanagement of such an important issue arises.

Second, I never questioned what YOU did for your country - I read your earlier posts. That remark was aimed at binkie. She continues to drone on and on about my views and how she is so opposed to them, however, even with all those strong sentiments she displays online have yet to compel her to do anything in the real world.

I also fully agree with you that America is currently full of whiners, not do'ers - on both sides of the issue and that life experiences do trump things you read on an internet blog.

I too think they should bring back the draft. Much like the earlier comment on having people participate more, although I don't like mandatory participation, I do feel in times of war EVERYONE has to do their part. If more people were FORCED into not only the debate but the actual DYING part of the war, feelings would be MUCH more focused and this war would be over FASTER. As it stands now, only those who were unlucky enough to be enlisted before bush took office are involved and those who have made a conscious choice to go to Iraq and joined after. If the ranks contained more average people who were being forced to fight against their will, this war would be over alot faster.

And finally, of course I have to agree with your assessment of a president who was involved in lying and sneaking to start an unpopular war.

Here is the problem though that I now see. The bush administration along with the congressional republican now keep pushing 'support our troops' as their new selling point on the war. They admit it was a mistake, they admit its going badly, but they say pulling out is bad for the troops and that sure, now everyone is against the war but pulling out is bad because it somehow 'hurts' the troops.

This is tripe. The best way to support the troops is to make sure they don't put themselves in the line of fire for lies and false accusations. Too late for that, so the best thing to do is get them home before they DIE for those lies.

Trying to once again wave the flag and claim patriotic duty to stay in a failed cause built on lies is no way to honour anyone.

Another thing that is starting to come to light with the current fight over funding is this -

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/...ies&eref=yahoo

Polls show 70%+ are now opposed to the war. Congress was given a mandate last election season - kicking the repubs out of congress was a clear sign of the peoples discontent.

Even with a majority in congress, an over-whelming majority of the people, a majority of the U.N. and most every world leader now opposing the war, nothing is happening.

This means one man, and his small cadre of insiders in the U.S. government are currently running the show against the will of pretty much the world. Since WW2 there has never been such agreement on everyone everywhere that one government needs to change course.

Yet even with all those factors now lining up, bush still is bucking the system and going his own way - and there is nothing that has been thought of that can stop him.

One thinks back to Russia during the cold war and it's war machine, which ironically enough was also in Afghanistan at the time. They did what they wanted - a small group of well-to-do people in the selected government running the lives of millions with little regard for their thoughts or feelings.

Today, we see the same on the other side of the ocean, however people claim it's a 'democracy'. I would say it's not - as if a president who was elected without the popular vote can start a war that is opposed by the majority there and opposed by a majority of the legislative branch and yet cannot be stopped, what good is the voice of dissent?

Sure Americans can complain, whine if you will, but in reality, today - it has no real bearing on the course of government. The government won't have you killed over it, they will probably just ruin your career like they have done in numerous cases to date (U.S. and UK), call you a whacko, and then still push forward with their own agenda.

Is that the same democracy they want to bring to Iraq? Isn't that exactly what they claim to be fighting?

03-19-2007, 04:19 AM	#261
CptSternn Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 4,587	Art - It sounds scary, but in yer last few posts, I agree with a few things you said. First off, I think people would value their citizenship more if they participated in the government. I don't think it should be mandatory, but do feel more should be done to get people involved BEFORE a crisis which divides a country gets to the point where people feel the HAVE to be involved due to the mismanagement of such an important issue arises. Second, I never questioned what YOU did for your country - I read your earlier posts. That remark was aimed at binkie. She continues to drone on and on about my views and how she is so opposed to them, however, even with all those strong sentiments she displays online have yet to compel her to do anything in the real world. I also fully agree with you that America is currently full of whiners, not do'ers - on both sides of the issue and that life experiences do trump things you read on an internet blog. I too think they should bring back the draft. Much like the earlier comment on having people participate more, although I don't like mandatory participation, I do feel in times of war EVERYONE has to do their part. If more people were FORCED into not only the debate but the actual DYING part of the war, feelings would be MUCH more focused and this war would be over FASTER. As it stands now, only those who were unlucky enough to be enlisted before bush took office are involved and those who have made a conscious choice to go to Iraq and joined after. If the ranks contained more average people who were being forced to fight against their will, this war would be over alot faster. And finally, of course I have to agree with your assessment of a president who was involved in lying and sneaking to start an unpopular war. Here is the problem though that I now see. The bush administration along with the congressional republican now keep pushing 'support our troops' as their new selling point on the war. They admit it was a mistake, they admit its going badly, but they say pulling out is bad for the troops and that sure, now everyone is against the war but pulling out is bad because it somehow 'hurts' the troops. This is tripe. The best way to support the troops is to make sure they don't put themselves in the line of fire for lies and false accusations. Too late for that, so the best thing to do is get them home before they DIE for those lies. Trying to once again wave the flag and claim patriotic duty to stay in a failed cause built on lies is no way to honour anyone. Another thing that is starting to come to light with the current fight over funding is this - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/...ies&eref=yahoo Polls show 70%+ are now opposed to the war. Congress was given a mandate last election season - kicking the repubs out of congress was a clear sign of the peoples discontent. Even with a majority in congress, an over-whelming majority of the people, a majority of the U.N. and most every world leader now opposing the war, nothing is happening. This means one man, and his small cadre of insiders in the U.S. government are currently running the show against the will of pretty much the world. Since WW2 there has never been such agreement on everyone everywhere that one government needs to change course. Yet even with all those factors now lining up, bush still is bucking the system and going his own way - and there is nothing that has been thought of that can stop him. One thinks back to Russia during the cold war and it's war machine, which ironically enough was also in Afghanistan at the time. They did what they wanted - a small group of well-to-do people in the selected government running the lives of millions with little regard for their thoughts or feelings. Today, we see the same on the other side of the ocean, however people claim it's a 'democracy'. I would say it's not - as if a president who was elected without the popular vote can start a war that is opposed by the majority there and opposed by a majority of the legislative branch and yet cannot be stopped, what good is the voice of dissent? Sure Americans can complain, whine if you will, but in reality, today - it has no real bearing on the course of government. The government won't have you killed over it, they will probably just ruin your career like they have done in numerous cases to date (U.S. and UK), call you a whacko, and then still push forward with their own agenda. Is that the same democracy they want to bring to Iraq? Isn't that exactly what they claim to be fighting?