There are at present no charges against any U.S soldiers who were involved in the Balkans, the move was to prevent soldiers from being charged in the future.
As for the world government, a tightly controled system with too much centralized control may not work very well, but to deal with issues on a global level we are going to need some sort of alliance of countries that answer to a common authority. As I said we are not ready for this yet, but in time it could be a possibility.
On the democracy issue, not ever country needs to have a system such as the one we use in the U.S, what I'm talking about is that every country on earth in one form or have a system by which the people of that country have a say in the way its run, that the country respects and protects the human rights of its citizens. The deatails as to which system they chose a repulblic, a direct democracy, or some sort of constitutional monarchy don't really matter as long as the people have freedom, and the country can deal rationaly with the international community. Once everyone plays by those simple rules, then we as a planet can really start to work together to fix our common problems. Of course this won't happen over night, but is is something that all of us who have the privilage of living in free states must push for.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
Can we get a definition of liberty/ freedom and democracy?
Democratic governments are NOT inherently free governments in the negative sense, they are only free in a positive sense, and by that I dont mean a normative value judgement
Democratic governments can be tyrannical, oppresive and brutal, it just means the majority apporves of such behavior. The National Socialist party was elected by an overwhelming majority of Germans at one point.
Republics are not necissarily free like that either, but republican governments tend to have more formal strictures about the origins and purposes of power, but again not necissarily so
Machiavelli was infavor of limited government oddly enough (Forget the Prince, Machiavelli is upto a different agenda in The Prince, he's trying to unify Italy, you want his actual political views you have to read his Discourses), while Roussoue wasnt.
This is part of the problem we have in these debates, its a definitional one, we dont realize what each side is arguing, or what they value
As for the World Court, its going to be a political tool, thats why we arent involved, the US involved in Human rights abuses? sure, but so are the French, British, Dutch, Belgian and other European governments And then we can move onto alot of other nations.
Frankly I want a full accounting of UN peacekeeping activities in the Balkans, the Dutch in particular are going to get a black eye for complicity in a blood bath that took place in a "safe haven" they were suppost to be protecting during the Bosnian conflict.
And I support bushes desires to pull out, the best way to avoid trouble is to not be there.
I find it funny, all those people who are against the WTO and IMF seem to support the ICC, but they are essentialy the same thing, an extra national law making orginization
When I talk about freedom I'm talking about the right of every human being to choose his or her path in life, to pursue his or her dreams and ambitions without the direct interference of any outside power so long as that person's choices do not infringe on the freedom of others.
Thats the best definition I could come up with. I do want to point out however that most of us here understand what freedom is, and the value it has to individuals. Definitions such as the one I gave may differ from person to person but the general basics are universal to all people.
As for democracy, as I said before I'm not trying to define the actual governmental system, but rather the idea of a free and open government that is responsible, and is acountable to its people.
As you said all governmental systems can become oppresive and brutal, but in systems where a large number of diverse voices have power as opposed a small group or single person the chances for the government to become tyranical are much lower. This is because most functioning democratic systems disperse power amoung several different groups and individuals therby preventing some lone nut to cause too much damage.
This is why democracies are usualy better than say a dictatorship at both perserving the rights of its people, and dealing with other countries in a calm and rational way.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
[quote]Originally posted by Aetius:
[b]I am not a bush supporter but I support the office of the presidency. The United States is taking all the actions they can take. [/b][/quote]
Way to go! Someone that doesn't necessarily like Bush himself but sees the wisdom in what he's doing...open minded people like you renew my hope in the human race.
Relating to other things said, I've already said in another thread about how the Citizen Corps is more like a new/improved CCC than the Nightwatch. Their function isn't security, if I read Bush right, it's after-the-fact cleanup and other humanitarian stuff.
In the current atmosphere of the US, a Nightwatch-like organization would not survive. Too many lawyers and reporters standing in the way. The liberals would have a field day with it. There's already talk of getting him impeached over this dren from that one company, how do you spell it, Haliburtin? Anyway, the SEC has already said there's no case there. Imagine if they could get a cadre of lawyers to say that he's violating the laws laid down by the founding fathers! They'd eat him alive. Alot would have to change before Bush could feasibly act like Clark. There are just too many anti-Bush nuts.
Which is a good thing, actually. Remember what Delenn said? Something about the Grey Council, and how they have only agreed completely on something once in their history, it being a terrible thing, and that she hopes it never happens again. If [i]everyone[/i] starts liking Bush, [i]that's[/i] when to start spewing the stuff about Clark.
[quote]Originally posted by Warleader D'Ren:
[b]at least he didn't sell nuclear secrets to china and played kissy face with known terrorist, aka clintonites[/b][/quote]
No, he just permanently normalized trade relations with a hostile nuclear communist power and had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Qeada. At least Clinton took a shot at bin Laden! (and was roundly criticized by the Republicans for it!)
------------------
AnlaShok, Captain of the Gray Hand of Fate Squadron
Sidhe-1
Wielder of the Big Heavy Hammer of Obvious Truth
"FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!"
"When I talk about freedom I'm talking about the right of every human being to choose his or her path in life, to pursue his or her dreams and ambitions without the direct interference of any outside power so long as that person's choices do not infringe on the
freedom of others. " (TheEXone)
This is a nice idealism, but its not realistic to many people in democratic and republican countries...
How is it unrealistic? Regardles of the problems we have in the U.S I can still pursue my dreams and generaly make my own choices concerning my life.
If you are talking about applying that to the rest of the world, people a few hundred years ago would have said the same thing about applying that to monarchies like Britain. Thats what they told people like John Locke- "nice dream but it will never work". There is nothing unrealistic about working towards giving everyone on earth the same rights and opportunities that we have.
I wasn't just referring to the US, everyone else has this problem to...
And yes, everyday regular joes with a little bit of money, or the ability to get at money, can make their dreams come true. But there are those who are just barely surviving, if surviving at all... whether its because they're poor, homeless, stuck in the ghettos or many other possibilities where hope has been lost....
however, this is off topic, since it really has nothing directly to do with bush or his administration in this conversation lol... sorry if I dragged us off...
[This message has been edited by Canuck (edited 07-26-2002).]
[quote]Originally posted by TheEXone:
[b]
As you said all governmental systems can become oppresive and brutal, but in systems where a large number of diverse voices have power as opposed a small group or single person the chances for the government to become tyranical are much lower. This is because most functioning democratic systems disperse power amoung several different groups and individuals therby preventing some lone nut to cause too much damage.
This is why democracies are usualy better than say a dictatorship at both perserving the rights of its people, and dealing with other countries in a calm and rational way.
[/b][/quote]
And in retaliation, democracies also become a "tyranny of the majority" where nothing but popular opinion hold sway, potentialy without any serious facts or discussion of the issues taking place. Thats why there are no pure democracies on the planet, they all have some sort of constitution which provides limitations to even democratic power, thus tying into one definition of a "republic" in that power is somehow formaly diffused through out the polity.
And as for the democratic peace hypothesis, democacies have only been predominante in the major circles of government for less then 50 years, Id wait another 50 before passing serious judgment on it.
[quote]No, he just permanently normalized trade relations with a hostile nuclear communist power and had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Qeada. At least Clinton took a shot at bin Laden! (and was roundly criticized by the Republicans for it!)[/quote]
Have you been living in a cave or something? Did you miss war of afhganistan? Or how about office of national security, get a grip
[quote]Originally posted by Tyvar:
[b] And in retaliation, democracies also become a "tyranny of the majority" where nothing but popular opinion hold sway, potentialy without any serious facts or discussion of the issues taking place. Thats why there are no pure democracies on the planet, they all have some sort of constitution which provides limitations to even democratic power, thus tying into one definition of a "republic" in that power is somehow formaly diffused through out the polity.[/b][/quote]
Thats not in conflict with what I'm saying, and as I said earlier in this thread a constitution and other controls are nessesary for effective governments. The point I was trying to make was that systems where a large and diverse number of voices are part of the government, it becomes more difficult for an individual tyrant to emerge as could be the case with a monarchy or dictatorship.
[quote]Originally posted by Tyvar:
[b] And as for the democratic peace hypothesis, democacies have only been predominante in the major circles of government for less then 50 years, Id wait another 50 before passing serious judgment on it.[/b][/quote]
Well I'd say 50 years is a pretty long time to judge the effectiveness of democratic governments. Look at Western Europe, despite hudreds of years of wars and conflicts, with the advent of a more democratic Europe those wars are no longer a bitter reality. I don't think anyone can claim that our current systems are perfect, but certainly they are the beter than anything before. While I think we have a long way to go in terms of creating better governments, I don't intend on waiting 50 years to find something better to releive the desperate conditions, and brutal wars many in our world face.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
see i go away for a week to hang with the amish and look what happens... so much to read... so little caring [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/tongue.gif[/img]
[quote]Originally posted by Warleader D'Ren:
[b] Have you been living in a cave or something? Did you miss war of afhganistan? Or how about office of national security, get a grip[/b][/quote]
Before September 11, Bush had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Quaeda members. Oops.
As far as the Homeland Security thing he's got going, isn't that really the responsibility of the NSA? Adding yet another layer of beauracracy instead of streamlining what we already have to work better is wasteful.
As far as this Afghanistan conflict goes, why are we going about it in such a half-assed way? It seems that our forces can be, and should be, a lot more effective than they have been. We're there with no clear objectives, no real mission, and no way to tell when or if we've accomplished anything. I hate seeing our brave soldiers used in a "wag the dog" situation by an illegitimate "president" intent on consolidating his grip on power.
[quote]Originally posted by AnlaShok:
[b] No, he just permanently normalized trade relations with a hostile nuclear communist power and had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Qeada. At least Clinton took a shot at bin Laden! (and was roundly criticized by the Republicans for it!)
[/b][/quote]
Actualy Clinton did all of the above. The approval of China's admintance into the WTO was done by Clinton, and following Oklahoma City, there were no efforts made by the CIA or FBI against Al Queda, all the manpower went into hunting right wing militias.
In fact there are roughly 60 boxes of evidence that were gathered following the 1993 attack, and its looking like if they had been analyzed we would have been able to nail their financial networks along with some fairly important people who were in Manila.
As for his "shot" at Al Queda, it was nothing more then a bandaid against targets that were only "possibly" linked to Al Queda, and in the end nothing important was done.
if i remember correctly they were chemical weapons plants.. yeah so nothing was done... right.
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
Alledged chemical weapons plants.
------------------
[url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Never eat anything bigger than your own head.[/url]
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
Here is a scary teaser on TIPS:
[url="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/08/06/tips/index_np.html"]http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/08/06/tips/index_np.html[/url]
Time to Tip (over) TIPS. TTTT [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
PS: I am sorry its cheesy but its late and I am tired
[quote]Originally posted by rcmodels:
[b]if i remember correctly they were chemical weapons plants.. yeah so nothing was done... right.[/b][/quote]
You remeber incorrectly, upon investigation it seems the chemical warfare plant that was hit in Sudan turned out to be a civilian pharmacetuical manufacturer, and there was little evidence of it being a chemical warfare plant.
Also the camp in afghanistan that was hit was empty and had been for a while.
Not old news at all. He had said several times how much easier his job would be if he was a dictator. He selected a man for attorney general who is politically far to the right of Darth Vader, whom even conservative Missouri elected a dead Democrat over....
The decision to allow HMOs to share your medical coverage with pharmeceutical manufacturers is just another example of how this administration will pimp your rights and privacy to their financial supporters.
(edited to remove H-scroll due to reundant link code)
------------------
AnlaShok, Captain of the Gray Hand of Fate Squadron
Sidhe-1
Wielder of the Big Heavy Hammer of Obvious Truth
"FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!"
[This message has been edited by AnlaShok (edited 08-14-2002).]
An interview with the reporter who wrote the above story.
[url="http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/cspin/cspin20020809.rm&start=%2218:53.1%22"]http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/cspin/cspin20020809.rm&start=%2218:53.1%22[/url]
Comments
As for the world government, a tightly controled system with too much centralized control may not work very well, but to deal with issues on a global level we are going to need some sort of alliance of countries that answer to a common authority. As I said we are not ready for this yet, but in time it could be a possibility.
On the democracy issue, not ever country needs to have a system such as the one we use in the U.S, what I'm talking about is that every country on earth in one form or have a system by which the people of that country have a say in the way its run, that the country respects and protects the human rights of its citizens. The deatails as to which system they chose a repulblic, a direct democracy, or some sort of constitutional monarchy don't really matter as long as the people have freedom, and the country can deal rationaly with the international community. Once everyone plays by those simple rules, then we as a planet can really start to work together to fix our common problems. Of course this won't happen over night, but is is something that all of us who have the privilage of living in free states must push for.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
Democratic governments are NOT inherently free governments in the negative sense, they are only free in a positive sense, and by that I dont mean a normative value judgement
Democratic governments can be tyrannical, oppresive and brutal, it just means the majority apporves of such behavior. The National Socialist party was elected by an overwhelming majority of Germans at one point.
Republics are not necissarily free like that either, but republican governments tend to have more formal strictures about the origins and purposes of power, but again not necissarily so
Machiavelli was infavor of limited government oddly enough (Forget the Prince, Machiavelli is upto a different agenda in The Prince, he's trying to unify Italy, you want his actual political views you have to read his Discourses), while Roussoue wasnt.
This is part of the problem we have in these debates, its a definitional one, we dont realize what each side is arguing, or what they value
As for the World Court, its going to be a political tool, thats why we arent involved, the US involved in Human rights abuses? sure, but so are the French, British, Dutch, Belgian and other European governments And then we can move onto alot of other nations.
Frankly I want a full accounting of UN peacekeeping activities in the Balkans, the Dutch in particular are going to get a black eye for complicity in a blood bath that took place in a "safe haven" they were suppost to be protecting during the Bosnian conflict.
And I support bushes desires to pull out, the best way to avoid trouble is to not be there.
I find it funny, all those people who are against the WTO and IMF seem to support the ICC, but they are essentialy the same thing, an extra national law making orginization
Thats the best definition I could come up with. I do want to point out however that most of us here understand what freedom is, and the value it has to individuals. Definitions such as the one I gave may differ from person to person but the general basics are universal to all people.
As for democracy, as I said before I'm not trying to define the actual governmental system, but rather the idea of a free and open government that is responsible, and is acountable to its people.
As you said all governmental systems can become oppresive and brutal, but in systems where a large number of diverse voices have power as opposed a small group or single person the chances for the government to become tyranical are much lower. This is because most functioning democratic systems disperse power amoung several different groups and individuals therby preventing some lone nut to cause too much damage.
This is why democracies are usualy better than say a dictatorship at both perserving the rights of its people, and dealing with other countries in a calm and rational way.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
[b]I am not a bush supporter but I support the office of the presidency. The United States is taking all the actions they can take. [/b][/quote]
Way to go! Someone that doesn't necessarily like Bush himself but sees the wisdom in what he's doing...open minded people like you renew my hope in the human race.
Relating to other things said, I've already said in another thread about how the Citizen Corps is more like a new/improved CCC than the Nightwatch. Their function isn't security, if I read Bush right, it's after-the-fact cleanup and other humanitarian stuff.
In the current atmosphere of the US, a Nightwatch-like organization would not survive. Too many lawyers and reporters standing in the way. The liberals would have a field day with it. There's already talk of getting him impeached over this dren from that one company, how do you spell it, Haliburtin? Anyway, the SEC has already said there's no case there. Imagine if they could get a cadre of lawyers to say that he's violating the laws laid down by the founding fathers! They'd eat him alive. Alot would have to change before Bush could feasibly act like Clark. There are just too many anti-Bush nuts.
Which is a good thing, actually. Remember what Delenn said? Something about the Grey Council, and how they have only agreed completely on something once in their history, it being a terrible thing, and that she hopes it never happens again. If [i]everyone[/i] starts liking Bush, [i]that's[/i] when to start spewing the stuff about Clark.
[b]at least he didn't sell nuclear secrets to china and played kissy face with known terrorist, aka clintonites[/b][/quote]
No, he just permanently normalized trade relations with a hostile nuclear communist power and had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Qeada. At least Clinton took a shot at bin Laden! (and was roundly criticized by the Republicans for it!)
------------------
AnlaShok, Captain of the Gray Hand of Fate Squadron
Sidhe-1
Wielder of the Big Heavy Hammer of Obvious Truth
"FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!"
freedom of others. " (TheEXone)
This is a nice idealism, but its not realistic to many people in democratic and republican countries...
If you are talking about applying that to the rest of the world, people a few hundred years ago would have said the same thing about applying that to monarchies like Britain. Thats what they told people like John Locke- "nice dream but it will never work". There is nothing unrealistic about working towards giving everyone on earth the same rights and opportunities that we have.
And yes, everyday regular joes with a little bit of money, or the ability to get at money, can make their dreams come true. But there are those who are just barely surviving, if surviving at all... whether its because they're poor, homeless, stuck in the ghettos or many other possibilities where hope has been lost....
however, this is off topic, since it really has nothing directly to do with bush or his administration in this conversation lol... sorry if I dragged us off...
[This message has been edited by Canuck (edited 07-26-2002).]
[b]
As you said all governmental systems can become oppresive and brutal, but in systems where a large number of diverse voices have power as opposed a small group or single person the chances for the government to become tyranical are much lower. This is because most functioning democratic systems disperse power amoung several different groups and individuals therby preventing some lone nut to cause too much damage.
This is why democracies are usualy better than say a dictatorship at both perserving the rights of its people, and dealing with other countries in a calm and rational way.
[/b][/quote]
And in retaliation, democracies also become a "tyranny of the majority" where nothing but popular opinion hold sway, potentialy without any serious facts or discussion of the issues taking place. Thats why there are no pure democracies on the planet, they all have some sort of constitution which provides limitations to even democratic power, thus tying into one definition of a "republic" in that power is somehow formaly diffused through out the polity.
And as for the democratic peace hypothesis, democacies have only been predominante in the major circles of government for less then 50 years, Id wait another 50 before passing serious judgment on it.
Have you been living in a cave or something? Did you miss war of afhganistan? Or how about office of national security, get a grip
[b] And in retaliation, democracies also become a "tyranny of the majority" where nothing but popular opinion hold sway, potentialy without any serious facts or discussion of the issues taking place. Thats why there are no pure democracies on the planet, they all have some sort of constitution which provides limitations to even democratic power, thus tying into one definition of a "republic" in that power is somehow formaly diffused through out the polity.[/b][/quote]
Thats not in conflict with what I'm saying, and as I said earlier in this thread a constitution and other controls are nessesary for effective governments. The point I was trying to make was that systems where a large and diverse number of voices are part of the government, it becomes more difficult for an individual tyrant to emerge as could be the case with a monarchy or dictatorship.
[quote]Originally posted by Tyvar:
[b] And as for the democratic peace hypothesis, democacies have only been predominante in the major circles of government for less then 50 years, Id wait another 50 before passing serious judgment on it.[/b][/quote]
Well I'd say 50 years is a pretty long time to judge the effectiveness of democratic governments. Look at Western Europe, despite hudreds of years of wars and conflicts, with the advent of a more democratic Europe those wars are no longer a bitter reality. I don't think anyone can claim that our current systems are perfect, but certainly they are the beter than anything before. While I think we have a long way to go in terms of creating better governments, I don't intend on waiting 50 years to find something better to releive the desperate conditions, and brutal wars many in our world face.
------------------
We Live as one, We die as one, We will face the darkness as one.
"Understanding is a Three Edged Sword- Your side, Their side, And the Truth...."
[b] Have you been living in a cave or something? Did you miss war of afhganistan? Or how about office of national security, get a grip[/b][/quote]
Before September 11, Bush had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Quaeda members. Oops.
As far as the Homeland Security thing he's got going, isn't that really the responsibility of the NSA? Adding yet another layer of beauracracy instead of streamlining what we already have to work better is wasteful.
As far as this Afghanistan conflict goes, why are we going about it in such a half-assed way? It seems that our forces can be, and should be, a lot more effective than they have been. We're there with no clear objectives, no real mission, and no way to tell when or if we've accomplished anything. I hate seeing our brave soldiers used in a "wag the dog" situation by an illegitimate "president" intent on consolidating his grip on power.
[b] No, he just permanently normalized trade relations with a hostile nuclear communist power and had the CIA and FBI lay off Al Qeada. At least Clinton took a shot at bin Laden! (and was roundly criticized by the Republicans for it!)
[/b][/quote]
Actualy Clinton did all of the above. The approval of China's admintance into the WTO was done by Clinton, and following Oklahoma City, there were no efforts made by the CIA or FBI against Al Queda, all the manpower went into hunting right wing militias.
In fact there are roughly 60 boxes of evidence that were gathered following the 1993 attack, and its looking like if they had been analyzed we would have been able to nail their financial networks along with some fairly important people who were in Manila.
As for his "shot" at Al Queda, it was nothing more then a bandaid against targets that were only "possibly" linked to Al Queda, and in the end nothing important was done.
------------------
[url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Never eat anything bigger than your own head.[/url]
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
[url="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/08/06/tips/index_np.html"]http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/08/06/tips/index_np.html[/url]
Time to Tip (over) TIPS. TTTT [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
PS: I am sorry its cheesy but its late and I am tired
[url="http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=13651&CFID=2355034&CFTOKEN=25805582"]http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=13651&CFID=2355034&CFTOKEN=25805582[/url]
is this old news ???
[b]if i remember correctly they were chemical weapons plants.. yeah so nothing was done... right.[/b][/quote]
You remeber incorrectly, upon investigation it seems the chemical warfare plant that was hit in Sudan turned out to be a civilian pharmacetuical manufacturer, and there was little evidence of it being a chemical warfare plant.
Also the camp in afghanistan that was hit was empty and had been for a while.
[b]GWB and GO 1984 ?????
[url="http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=13651&CFID=2355034&CFTOKEN=25805582"]http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=13651&CFID=2355034&CFTOKEN=25805582[/url]
is this old news ???[/b][/quote]
Not old news at all. He had said several times how much easier his job would be if he was a dictator. He selected a man for attorney general who is politically far to the right of Darth Vader, whom even conservative Missouri elected a dead Democrat over....
The decision to allow HMOs to share your medical coverage with pharmeceutical manufacturers is just another example of how this administration will pimp your rights and privacy to their financial supporters.
(edited to remove H-scroll due to reundant link code)
------------------
AnlaShok, Captain of the Gray Hand of Fate Squadron
Sidhe-1
Wielder of the Big Heavy Hammer of Obvious Truth
"FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!"
[This message has been edited by AnlaShok (edited 08-14-2002).]
[url="http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/cspin/cspin20020809.rm&start=%2218:53.1%22"]http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/cspin/cspin20020809.rm&start=%2218:53.1%22[/url]