Moral truths are determined at home or in the community. Not by a government imposing its will. America was built on that principle. Tolerance. Why are we morally correct? As a government we have no right to impose our views on others. As people we can try to convince others of our beliefs. Girlie men hide behind religion and are afraid to let others have opinions that differ with their own.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/020806-iraq1.htm http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/al-udeid-imagery2.htm
War with Iraq..... Well America has fought wars both just and unjust. This is our history. Chas makes a valid point in that the leaders of our nation have information that we as citizens do not. This is the way it is. We are not going to vote on a referendum whether to attack or not. We are not that kind of democracy for a reason. Even in 2002 it is not a particularly efficient form of government (let alone in 1776, when TV was still black and white and no cable, and the internet was reaaaaallly slow). So we are at the whim of our elected representatives and leaders. This we just must live with. Obviously they have made some grave mistakes in the past. Too many to even begin to contemplate. But time goes by, things change. Attitudes and standards change. Enemies become allies, and vice versa. So we have really no choice but to trust the system that for the most part has worked quite well for over 200 years. Which is longer than any other that I am aware of (though I know I will get responses with examples of Upper Bullguano or some other super power I never heard of). Now if our main guy hadn't traded Sammy Sosa to the Cubs, I would be a bit more comfortable. But so it goes! RS7
Well, I wouldn't say at all that it's working real well, I'd say it's more the altar of the image than that of the reality that many are praying at: Real weekly wages in the U.S. rose until 1973, and have been declining since. A survey of 26 industrialized nations (the Luxembourg Income Study) found that the gap between the wealthiest 10% and the poorest 10% is greater in the United States than any other country except Russia (Wallechinsky 6). Percentage of U.S. children who live in poverty: 20 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000) Percentage of U.S. adults who live in poverty: 12 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000) Percentage of single mothers who live in poverty: 37.4% (U.S. Census Bureau, 1999) Rank of the U.S. among the seventeen leading industrial nations with the largest percentage of their populations in poverty: 1 (United Nations Human Development Report 1998, N.Y.C.) Number of families or primary individuals who live in mobile homes or trailers: 6.8 million (U.S. Census Bureau, American Housing Survey, 1999) About 15 million children -- one out of every four -- live below the official poverty line. 22% of Americans under the age of 18 -- and 25% under age 12 -- are hungry or at the risk of being hungry. As far as what our elected reps know, or rather don't know as far as the economy is concerned, here is a good read I found on Babaks other thread here: http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1012 Or take the instance where on the massive lobbying of vested interest groups accounting laws were not passed that would have saved us from some of the Enron et al fallout that, amongst others, Ãs responsible for this crisis of confidence that we haven't seen in our lifetimes, and probably not since the great depression. Also, I by no means agree that we have to agree with anything much that doesn't stand up to good ole common sense, that no other international ally is supportive of, and where one of our own top experts on the subject, a Republican, 12 year veteran of the Marine Corps, former intelligence officer, and a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, Scott Ritter, wasn't even invited to testify at the Senate Propaganda Show. http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul40.html As far as agreeing with anything our elected representatives come up with goes that cannot be subsumed under, again, common sense, as the mere fact of holding office doesn't all of a sudden infuse you with greater comprehension and insight in interpreting facts that for most practical purposes are mostly freely available to all nowadays anyway, I'm all with Henry David Thoreau and Civil Disobedience: "Men make an arbitrary code, and because it is not right, they try to make it prevail by might. The moral law does not want any champion. Its asserters do not go to war. It was never infringed with impunity." "The law will never make men free; it is men who have got to make the law free. They are the lovers of law and order, who observe the law when the government breaks it. " Call it the fourth branch of power, if you will, namely, We, The People: The Declaration of Independence establishes the supremacy of the People and the Right and Duty to defend the Rights of the People over the Acts of the Government. Our Constitution provides for as many protections as possible to ensure that the Government is subservient to the People and only exists for the purpose of serving the People. However, should these protections fail it is up to the People to rise up against the Government and to put the Government back in it's place. In this capacity, the People act as the fourth branch of government to take control and to override their decisions that violate the Fundamental Rights of the People to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. By what means do the People exercise their authority over the Government? That depends on how resistant the Government is to complying with the Will of the People. In the case of the Declaration of Independence, it meant declaring war on the Government and overthrowing them. This is obviously a last resort after taking other steps less harsh. But clearly the Right and the Duty to overthrow the Government in order to restore the United States as a government to serve the People is clearly established in historical precedent. The People Exercise their Powers There are several examples where the People have risen up against the Government in order to reestablish the supremacy of the Will of the People over the interests of the Government. The most memorable event in recent history is the Vietnam War. The Government got us involved in a useless war and got stuck there. It was a war that was clearly wrong, the People didn't support the war, and the Government refused to serve the interests of the People and allowed themselves to be controlled by the interests of those who were profiting from the war. In fairness, there was a national pride factor involved as well. America wasn't ready to admit that we were wrong and to conceal the truth from the People. It was a time when the Government served it's own interests and the interests of people who put their personal profits ahead of the good of the people. In this case the people rose up against the Government and we fought them. We protested, we rioted, we broke the laws, and we forced the Government to be subservient to the People and to get out of Vietnam. We put the Government back in its place to serve us, and not to rule us. We let the Government know that they can not order us into battle to die against our will to fight a war that served no public purpose. When the Government violates the Constitution, it is the duty of the People to rise up against the Government to bring the Government into compliance with the Constitution. On a local level, here in Springfield Missouri, the City Council decided to take the farm of a farming family, who had a well run dairy farm, for the purpose of building an industrial park. The location of the park was chosen so as to be inside the city limits so that Springfield Schools would get the taxes instead of Strafford Schools. Legally, the City had the powers of Eminent Domain to take the land. There was no procedure to stop the City from running the farmers off this 100-year-old family farm. But the People rose up against the City Council and through the sheer force of will the People let the City Council of Springfield Missouri know that the People, acting as the 4th branch of Government, were going to prevent it from happening. http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...+right+to+fight+the+government&hl=de&ie=UTF-8[/url]
http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm Read this. It will clear up a lot of things about your 'chief executive'.
Hey that's a good one ! We the people got the victory over the city counsel in Mo. Sadam gassed people for less than that.I don't see oil [black gold, texas tea]as the main issue. That evil doer does far more than his nickname of ''the butcher of Bagdad'' would suggest. ------------------------------------- Peace. And a Star Wars trend- ''The stars in thier courses[spheres] fought''
america right or wrong? Obviously the Bush family as well as much of our elected government has a lot of shameful skeletons in their collective closets. Power breeds power. G.W. has as little qualification for his job as any president certainly in my life time. Maybe ever. I am no great scholar of Amirican history. I only know that I am allowed to say whatever I chose, vote for whomever I want, read anything at all, and enjoy more freedom than I could anywhere else. Now our freedom is not unlimited. And that is sadly an unavoidable situation. Anarchy however, wouldn't be particularly efficient. I like having roads and utilities and most of the convieniences afforded us by the often corrupt layers of our government. Of which I think there are quite a few too many. Now I agree that our govenment is and has been run with the interests of the few far and above the interests of the many. I went to jail for resisting the Viet Nam war. They gave me a choice then to stay in jail, or go serve. We worked out a deal. I did neither. (I did, however make my visit to SE Asia, and was subjected to quite a lot of harsh living...including being shot). But the bottom line is I think (too idealistically?) that the government is salvageable, the freedoms we enjoy are worth a price, and that I for one would rather stay and fight for what I believe America can and should be than to just abandon hope or the country itself. And for any who wish to leave, they at least have the freedom to do that too. I know the Soviet Union is beyond the time scope for some of the traders here. But to know the conditions of living under that "experiment" is to know how bad things can really be. Those who did not like living there could try and "escape"...at the risk of being shot at the border. I was in St. Petersburg two years ago. The appreciation for Americans and America there was incredible. Peace and Freedom and Good Trading...we are capitalists all (at least the ones here who actually trade, as it is now time for me to do). RS7