Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
:mad: Must be something in the water. There is so much on the web that cries out to be blogged. Some days there is nothing (you are the pigeon) and some days there is too much to handle (you are the statue).
Well today I want to start with a rant. Think back to pre WWII. Think back to the arrogance of colonial powers making arbitrary (and inappropriate) decisions about colonies and “unimportant” countries. Think about the absolute and complete sheer-bloody-mindedness of a British Prime Minister giving away a country (I have made peace in our time). I’m not debating that he bought time, I’m not arguing that it was the wrong decision, I am arguing that he had no right to do that. It was the same after WWI and WWII where the victors decided not only the fate of the loosers but also the fate of anyone not big enough to stop them. After WWI, Australia asked why it was not included in the discussions and Britain responded that it would talk for Australia. The Prime Minister of the day pointed out that Britain could not speak for the Australian dead.
[Amateur historians might like to check out Digger History which points out that the Australian death rate of 145 per 1000 mobilized was higher than any other commonwealth country - mainly due to the British stuff-up at Gallipoli.]
What bought this rant up was the absolutely unbelievable headline on the BBC news site: India and China agree over Tibet. While it is good to know that the world’s two largest (population) nations are talking, but what gives them the right to decide the fate of Tibet? China’s “right” to include Tibet is exactly as legitimate as their claim to Taiwan, Korea (all of it), Japan, and all the other places that at some point in time were vassal states of China. This is arrogant nonsense. What do the people of Tibet want? I exclude the opinion of those who were shipped in by China to rig the question. If the question is asked only of those born in Tibet prior to the occupation by China, what would the answer be?
It is terrible to see that India, who managed to throw off the colonial legacy of the British is now adopting British style tactics in dealing with their smaller neighbours. Surely they can do better. As for China, it has been recalcitrant about Tibet all along and so maybe the expectation of sanity and honesty is not as well founded.
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
The purpose of most wars, and Iraq is no exception, is to distract the public so we don't see what else they are doing.
"HEY LOOK OVER THERE. IT'S A WAR." (insert hand remove wallet)
The House has just passed HR10, portions of which establish a national ID database. (Big Brother is watching you). It still has a long way to go before it becomes law. So... keep watching the war.
I, for one, don't feel any safer with Homeland Security established, and the expenditure of many billions of dollars. Nor does the watering down of basic rights via the (anti)Patriot Act make me less nervous.
Undoubtedly there will be another terrorist attack, after which we will be told that Homeland Security is underfunded, and needs a few more billions of dollars. Then there will be yet another attack, more billions, etc., etc., etc.
How many times have we heard that __________ (fill in the blank) is underfunded, and that the problem can be fixed if we just give up some of our rights along with some of our money? I have been hearing this all my life (and that's a very long time). I'm beginning to distrust politicians.
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Does it matter?
Shogun, here is the link you did not provide (http://www.guru-international.com/gd...so-little-time). When your post is just copied from another source should you not give a little credit to the original author? Likewise, your other post from today (A Lack of Trained Staff…) is actually a copy from (http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/...htip/motiv.htm). And (http://www.ojc.edu/faculty_staff/tea...nmotivated.htm) Again you just pass it off as your own thoughts.
I do not suggest that we cannot build on others thoughts, or necessarily have to provide a link every time we use some material from another source (book, web etc.) as this could be to bothersome and may not make for easy reading, but if the bulk of the post is just copied from another source we should give a reference so other people can take this into account when the read the post.
I think it is great that you try to stimulate discussion, provide a lot of information and that you like to educate fellow posters, but it would be better if you also provided references when appropriate.
When I read something on this forum, I expect it to be based on personal experience – mostly with refrigeration – and precisely this personal view and experience is of great value. I would like to be told if the post is just copied from somewhere else. When you consistently post large posts which is just copied / scanned without giving references and thus pass it off as your personal view / experience it is actually very misleading.
I don’t like to be misled and it is not hard to supply proper references when appropriate, so, yes, it does matter.
Saludos,
Jan Steen
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Hi Gary,
Only JUST beginning to distrust politicians, :confused: What a trusting guy, :rolleyes: Maybe we would all benefit from one of your trouble shooting books, this time on how to spot a political double cross. I was thinking something on the lines of- TECH method
Spot the T ruth
Political E nlightenment
Dollar C ost of public confusion
H elp for those poor souls not convinced :)
Hmmmm, come to think of it, instead of being a 4 year labour of love...this book could become a lifetime sentence :eek: :eek: :eek:
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Actually, I haven't trusted politicians for a very long time. I am a card carrying member of the Libertarian Party, and in fact I ran for office a few years back. If it weren't for the Libertarians, I wouldn't waste my time going to the voting booth. A vote for the lesser of evils is a vote for bad government. We can never hope to have good government unless/until we vote for good government.
http://www.lp.org
I have a moral/ethical premise which guides me in judging all human interaction, including politics, i.e. non-defensive force is wrong.
Human beings have an inherent right to defend themselves. Specifically, we defend life, liberty, and property, and view the actions of those we defend against as "wrong". Thus we have an instinctive/inherent definition of wrong (non-defensive force).
How then would I define right? Any subjective choice of lifestyle, action, or inaction which does not involve the use of non-defensive force against others. IOW, live and let live.
Since we as individuals have an inherent right to defend ourselves, we as a group have an inherent right to collectively defend ourselves, and that is the legitimate basis for governments. Unfortunately, governments go far beyond this, infringing upon the very rights they should be helping us to defend.
Politicians in general are thieves and dictators. But sad to say, they are truly representative of the majority of the voters. People tend to vote for those who promise them benefits at someone else's expense (thieves), and/or those who promise to control the non-aggressive behavior of their neighbors (dictators).
I don't realistically see this changing anytime soon. Politicians appeal to the dark side of human nature, and the vast majority lack moral/ethical definition.
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc O'Brien
I wonder, which of the other empires did a better job in colonising the world? France, Germany, Spain?
Yeh me too! :confused:
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Quote:
Originally Posted by PobodysNerfect
Does it matter?
Shogun, here is the link you did not provide (
http://www.guru-international.com/gd...so-little-time). When your post is just copied from another source should you not give a little credit to the original author? Likewise, your other post from today (A Lack of Trained Staff…) is actually a copy from (
http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/...htip/motiv.htm). And (
http://www.ojc.edu/faculty_staff/tea...nmotivated.htm) Again you just pass it off as your own thoughts.
I do not suggest that we cannot build on others thoughts, or necessarily have to provide a link every time we use some material from another source (book, web etc.) as this could be to bothersome and may not make for easy reading, but if the bulk of the post is just copied from another source we should give a reference so other people can take this into account when the read the post.
I think it is great that you try to stimulate discussion, provide a lot of information and that you like to educate fellow posters, but it would be better if you also provided references when appropriate.
When I read something on this forum, I expect it to be based on personal experience – mostly with refrigeration – and precisely this personal view and experience is of great value. I would like to be told if the post is just copied from somewhere else. When you consistently post large posts which is just copied / scanned without giving references and thus pass it off as your personal view / experience it is actually very misleading.
I don’t like to be misled and it is not hard to supply proper references when appropriate, so, yes, it does matter.
Saludos,
Jan Steen
Jan Steen[/QUOTE]
Dear Jan,
If I was writing a college essay or theses I would agree with you. You say: “When I read something on this forum I expect it to be based on personal experience-mostly with Refrigeration”, “WHY”, this is a discussion board with various forums to discuss many matters. This was posted under chitchat I believe. With regards to large posts as my own: I find” LIFT” many things from many sources and post them for discussion to see if I can stimulate controversy and various points of view, now if you or anyone thinks it’s all my work then let me set the record straight right now, it’s not, however, I have posted web sites in the past when I thought it was appropriate and in my estimation the Computer and Internet is like a vast infinite source on free speech and information available to us to exercise our brains. So in the future don’t be misled into believing every thing others and I post is all their own thoughts. I will try to do better :rolleyes:
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc O'Brien
Lol, tough choice hey :)
You're funny sometimes, Shogun, you're not always just a big buffoon.
Actually I'm quite small 5' 2"...110lbs :rolleyes:
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Quote:
The House has just passed HR10, portions of which establish a national ID database. (Big Brother is watching you). It still has a long way to go before it becomes law. So... keep watching the war.
The wife and I have just enjoyed a 2 week break in the Florida Keys but had to suffer the embarrasment of being fingerprinted and photographed upon our arrival in the good old US of A. Don't you trust our British passport details?
We also are in the throws of hearing the Government ranting on about the introduction of national ID cards for every British citizen - don't they realise that documents can be forged? :confused:
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Quote:
Originally Posted by frank
The wife and I have just enjoyed a 2 week break in the Florida Keys but had to suffer the embarrasment of being fingerprinted and photographed upon our arrival in the good old US of A. Don't you trust our British passport details?
We also are in the throws of hearing the Government ranting on about the introduction of national ID cards for every British citizen - don't they realise that documents can be forged?
Ummmm... doesn't the question at the end of the second paragraph answer the question in the first paragraph?
And why is that embarassing? Do you have ugly fingers?
Besides, you did invade us and burn our capital while we were preoccupied with stealing the rest of the country from the natives. Such short memories!
Besides, who's going to believe anybody except spies would want to visit Florida during hurricane season? Very suspicious.
(Sounds like our visit to New York in July, actually. It's amazing how inexpensive it is to fly to places no one in his right mind wants to be during certain seasons of the year!)
Sorry about the hassles, Frank. I hope the rest of your stay was enjoyable. Did you get in any kite flying?
Rog
Re: Iraq today, but who was innocent yesterday
Quote:
And why is that embarassing? Do you have ugly fingers?
Have you seen my fingers? - Oh Yeah, I can make the ladies smile :D
Quote:
Besides, you did invade us and burn our capital while we were preoccupied with stealing the rest of the country from the natives. Such short memories!
As we were there for Columbus Day (why celebrate the guy that discovered you?) - and no one seemed to know who he was - who's got the short memory? :D
Quote:
Besides, who's going to believe anybody except spies
Jeeese! I thought I had a perfect cover - visiting a way out place under hurricane conditions just to check and report on the latest election situation
As someone said to me while there - " would you trust a leadership based on BUSH, Di*K (Cheynee) and COLON(Powel)"
Rog, Thanks, yes we had a great time and I love the US, always had great service and friendly company. Can't wait to visit again.
P.S.
I was only approached once by the "Queens" in Key West - Jeeze I thought I was more attractive than that :D
