America - The Official Thread

[///M-Spec]

(///M you left a loophole for me to talk about something other than foreign policy. I figured I'd take it, but let me know if you think this is outside the scope of this thread. I intend to post a follow-up to this that ties these concepts into our foreign policy later

Neither you nor MrktMkr are OT at all. In fact, I am happy to see the quality level of debate going on here, which is much higher than I expected.... with the exception of one poster. My thanks to you both for making the the bulk of this thread nice to read.

MrktMkr, it would be nice to see a definition of neo-imperialism. Maybe I missed it?

EDIT: Whoops. Nevermind. I found it. I don't really agree with the term "Imperialism". I understand what you are describing, but key to the notion of Imperialism is economic choice. When I have more time to elaborate, I'll come back to this.


M

 

[Danoff]

danoff's the one talking about how the US is justified in making Iraq a 51st state. I was only trying to find out from him whether or not he feels Iraq's decision to take back Kuwait is in any way similar to our taking over (err... initiating a regime change in) Iraq.

No. Kuwait had not attacked one of Iraq's allys and therefore the attack was unprovoked. The US, however, was issuing a provoked response.

The justification of Gulf War I was that one of our allys was attacked.
The justification for Gulf War II is that the terms of the cease fire in Gulf War I were violated.
The justification for making Iraq the 51st state is the same as either justification for either Gulf War.

The justification for Iraq invaing Kuwait was oil (which isn't a real justification).

Hopefully I cleared that up.

Then why, might I ask, did President Bush talk about the major importance of making the US less dependent on other countries for oil in his State Of The Union address tonight?

Less dependent is always a good thing, whether we get 50% or 5% of our oil from aboard. It always sounds good in a speech.

About the oil...OF COURSE IT WAS ABOUT OIL. Who would give a flying corn studded crap about the whole region ..IF IT WAS NOT FOR OIL ?

Because from that region come terrorists that kill us. It's not for oil.

 

[Delirious]

simply put, why not have our nation turn back to God and make things a lot easier for everyone

 

[Tacet_Blue]

simply put, why not have our nation turn back to God and make things a lot easier for everyone

Those Witch Hunts were great fun...I can't wait to get back to the good old days of unfair trials and killing in the name of God.

 

[PublicSecrecy]

simply put, why not have our nation turn back to God and make things a lot easier for everyone

um...isn't that a form of terrorism? you know...the whole forcing your religion upon someone else? I don't even know where to begin on this one.

 

[PublicSecrecy]

Stay on topic please

That was like my first off-topic post! ...next to this one...I'm done now.

 

[///M-Spec]

That was like my first off-topic post! ...next to this one...I'm done now.

Actually, by your own admission it's your third, even if we don't count the posts about the "Pentagon plane cover-up" or the out of nowhere comment about right angles. Mike Rotch had in fact, given you plenty of slack.

[/offtopic] How old are you?

[off topic rant] I know it sounds funny, and paranoid, and stupid, but if you think about it, all that conspiracy crap could be true. Example: Even the FDA, and all the drugs, they don't want anyone to know about the fact that there actually is a cure for herpes, tuberculosis, polymyalgia, osteoperosis, etc. If we have to keep taking drugs, they keep making money, and we only have results that are half as good as they could be (cures, recoveries etc.) . They're (when I say "they" it usually means an indiscriminate company, honcho, corporate head, etc. of the given subject) even pushing to make Vitamins sold as drugs, but in the rules of the FDA, they can only be sold as a drug if it has solid, documented proof and evidence of what the vitamin does, the side affects, and the full extent as to which it affects someone. And because vtiamins are clearly benneficial, the profits that the drug companies would reap from it would be in enormous amounts. Of course that will never happen because selling cereal would then mean selling a drug, to anyone, which is illegal, and lets not mention the fact that vitamins are found in just about every fruit and vegetable you can think of. It would be like finding acetaminophen in everything you ate, it would all have to be revoked or sold over counters and not off shelves. Of course this is just an example. [/end off topic rant]

M

 

[Tacet_Blue]

Actually, his "How Old are you?" was my fault...sorry

 

[PublicSecrecy]

Actually, by your own admission it's your third, even if we don't count the posts about the "Pentagon plane cover-up" or the out of nowhere comment about right angles. Mike Rotch had in fact, given you plenty of slack.







M

You're dragging the offtopicness on longer than it needs to be. tisk tisk Mspec!

 

[Duke]

simply put, why not have our nation turn back to God and make things a lot easier for everyone

"Back" to God? Sorry, but even though there are many Christians in America, America is not and never was a Christian nation... At least I'm assuming you mean the Christian God.

No matter what god you mean, it sure as hell wouldn't make things any easier for me and a number of other people on this board, so there goes your "everyone" theory.

 

[Solid Fro]

simply put, why not have our nation turn back to God and make things a lot easier for everyone

"God" has never made anything easier. Go ask the Israelis and the Palestinians, if you don't believe me.

 

[Anderton Prime]

"God" has never made anything easier. Go ask the Israelis and the Palestinians, if you don't believe me.

Amen. Pun intended.

 

[Delirious]

why wouldnt it make things easier? it wouldnt be forcing religion down peoples throats by the way if they chose to turn back to God willingly

also, the Israelis are God's people...that would cause contentions with the palestinians

 

[McLaren]

I doubt any of them are going to turn to "Him" (Not Satan) to make things easier.

 

[Sage]

why wouldnt it make things easier?

Oh come on, think! We [atheists] already have issues with the government due to some of its religious "clingings" – same sex marriage should be legalized, we shouldn't have to say "under God" in the pledge or see it on our money, the whole stem cell snafoo, etc. Those all wouldn't be issues if the government were blind to religion, and you're proposing that they fully engulf themselves in religious values? I might as well live in the Middle East then, where politics and religion intermingle way too much.

You still haven't answered my question of whether or not you'd be willing to argue objectively. Not that I'm angry about it, but I'd like to know.

it wouldnt be forcing religion down peoples throats by the way if they chose to turn back to God willingly

I just listed above how it does. Let's take Ten (the member, not the number) as an example. He's openly gay, which I'm assuming means to you that he's willingly turning his back to God (and if he's atheist, then even more so). Because the government feels religion needs to dictate the definition of marriage, Ten absolutely cannot get married in the U.S. Thus, religious values are being imposed on him without his consent. Right?

 

[MrktMkr1986]

why wouldnt it make things easier?

As much as I believe in God, I cannot ignore the fact that history shows that wars have been fought over religion. Right now, we should concentrate on deterring terrorism, and foreign policy issues. If we can find a solution to these problems (foreign issues) then we can start solving our own problems (domestic issues).

it wouldnt be forcing religion down peoples throats by the way if they chose to turn back to God willingly

True.

However, there is a sizable chunk of the population that does not believe in God. So few may accept this idea.

also, the Israelis are God's people...that would cause contentions with the palestinians

Is that your opinion? Are you a Zionist? I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to prove.

If you are trying to assert what I think you're trying to assert, then I just have this to say:

Allah and God are the same thing.

Also, similar to what danoff did, I am in the process of writing an essay concerning my views of American foreign policy. It should be finished by tomorrow.

 

[a6m5]

Just to clarify, God(at least mine) isn't killing anybody, men are. They are committing crime in name of God.

 

[PS]

why wouldnt it make things easier? it wouldnt be forcing religion down peoples throats by the way if they chose to turn back to God willingly

also, the Israelis are God's people...that would cause contentions with the palestinians

May I remind you, the wars as a result of religion have been continuing for 2000 years.

 

[Delirious]

mostly concerning the catholic church during the crusades ...forcing "barbarians" as they called them, either to become catholic, or kill them...

also recently, mostly radical islamists are the ones killing people...

i really dont think christianity today or in the past is really into killing people and war...thats not what christianity is about (im pretty sure everyone knows what christianity is about, if not, PM me)

 

[a6m5]

i really dont think christianity today or in the past is really into killing people and war...thats not what christianity is about (im pretty sure everyone knows what christianity is about, if not, PM me)

Today, not really. Unfortunately, it's an historical fact that many were murdered in the name of Churches and Christianity in the past, and no, that's not what Christianity is about......

 

[PS]

Either way, trying to base a government around religion, is not a good idea in any way. Only in very few societies has a religiously founded government ever suceeded (The Vatican...and...uh...that's about it). Other than that...people either A) move out B) start wars or C) revolt. Not everyone is religious, and not all believe in the same religion to top it off.

 

[ledhed]

mostly concerning the catholic church during the crusades ...forcing "barbarians" as they called them, either to become catholic, or kill them

So the 30 years war the Hugenots the Wars of reformation , the " struggles in Ireland...the ethnic cleansing in Armenia , Kosovo and all over Serbia..the civil war in Sudan and the fight in the Phillipines against the Christians and the Muslim minority insurgents not to mention the good old KKK...they dont count right ? Wake up and smell the bodys dude. So called Christians make the Muslims look like amatuer hour when it comes to good old fashioned murder.
Being religiouse shouldnt make you blind to history.

 

[///M-Spec]

Let's not stray too far from the topic, okay? Religion, including church & state issues are covered in other threads.


M

 

[Anderton Prime]

Let's not stray too far from the topic, okay? Religion, including church & state issues are covered in other threads.


M

What are you talking about? YOU started this thread so we would all have a place to argue and discuss topics pertaining to America, presumably so such arguments wouldn't pollute other threads. Now you're telling people not to stray from the topic at hand? Religion IS the topic at hand right now in this thread. And it has a LOT to do with America. Let everyone debate as you said you would; this thread is perfect for such discussion.

Religion and ethics may be covered in other threads, but so is criticism and support of "US leadership, US policy and US action."

 

[Tacet_Blue]

What are you talking about? YOU started this thread so we would all have a place to argue and discuss topics pertaining to America, presumably so such arguments wouldn't pollute other threads. Now you're telling people not to stray from the topic at hand? Religion IS the topic at hand right now in this thread. And it has a LOT to do with America. Let everyone debate as you said you would; this thread is perfect for such discussion.

Religion and ethics may be covered in other threads, but so is criticism and support of "US leadership, US policy and US action."

Yes, but this could go on to "Does God Exist" "Creationism", "Is there a Heaven" etc all of those issues have there own ( huge! ) threads. And we've already moved on to Israel and Palestine's religious conflicts, which are not US related. (don't even mention foreign policy being the cause...those conflicts have been going on since before the constitution )

I agree that there are some issues though that are valid here...such as.

Bush, well known Christian. Does his faith interfere with his policy making. Should it be a factor in ethical/moral debates, like his stance on abortion, or should a President look at things from a purely objective view as in what is best for the country, and not what fits best with his own personal belief.

 

[Anderton Prime]

I think the religious war between Israel and Palestine is very important and pertinent to the discussion of US foreign policy here. The US may not have had anything to do with STARTING the conflict, but it has decided to make the war its business for many years now. I agree that a full-on discussion of religion has no place here, but as long as it's related to the US it's in the perfect spot.

 

[Danoff]

Bush, well known Christian. Does his faith interfere with his policy making. Should it be a factor in ethical/moral debates, like his stance on abortion, or should a President look at things from a purely objective view as in what is best for the country, and not what fits best with his own personal belief

It is totally ok for politicians to be religious (good luck finding ones that aren't). The problem is the extent to which their religion causes them to make arbitrary choices.

Bush would probably say that his religion gives him the moral foundation that makes him want to stop terrorism or lower taxes. The issue is the for religious people their faith influences their entire lives - so any policy making that any religious people make is influenced by religion... and that's ok.

The problem is when religion becomes the only deciding factor. The bible cannot be justification for policy. It has to be some other argument, ethics or a sense of justice which may be instilled by religion but has some logic behind it is acceptible.

To say that man cannot marry man because the bible says it should not be so, or because marriage is an institution of God is not right. To say that man cannot marry man because marriage is defined (rather arbitrarily) to be between a man and woman is acceptible in my mind - but it begs the question of whether we can define a term for the equivalent of man marrying man (like civil union).

Many people think aborition is a religious subject. That pro-lifers are religious. This is not necessarily the case. Some pro-lifers are atheists - they simply believe that life begins at conception. This is something of a judgement call. Aborition is a nasty subject that rational, logical people can disagree on . There are solid arguments all the way around. Saying that you have to keep religion out of it is not going to help and isn't possible for religious people.

Stem cell research is linked with abortion. If you're pro-life you should not be ok with stem cell research because you believe that every specimine used is a dead person.

So none of these cases necessitate a religious bias to land on either side of the issue. And as long as rational arguments are posed it's not a problem. I have not heard Bush say that he is against gay marriage because it is ordained by God. He says that marriage is defined to be between a man and woman (which is true) and that he doesn't see a reason to change that. He's silent on the issue of creating a new (differently named) instituation for gays (which I suspect is where his religious bias comes into play). I've never heard him say that he's anti-aborition because God ordained that it is so - his justification is that he believes life starts at conception, which is a reasonable thing to believe (even though I disagree). Perhaps it is motivated by religion but as long as it isn't justified by religion that's ok.

(bold added to make the post easier to read since before it was just a block of plain old boring text)

 

[///M-Spec]

What are you talking about? YOU started this thread so we would all have a place to argue and discuss topics pertaining to America, presumably so such arguments wouldn't pollute other threads. Now you're telling people not to stray from the topic at hand?

It is a pre-emptive reminder. I see several opportunities for religion to take this thread into la-la land. It is a friendly reminder which is why there is a smiley at the end. Don't get your feathers in a ruffle. I would also appreciate it if you check the tone of your own posts. You wondered why I respond harshly towards you in another thread; posts like these are exactly why.

I agree that a full-on discussion of religion has no place here

Precisely what I am asking people not to do.


M

 

[Anderton Prime]

Precisely what I am asking people not to do.


M

Not a problem, but maybe you should be more "precise" in your warnings. I wasn't really angry so much as confused.

 

[Famine]

Let's take Ten (the member, not the number) as an example. He's openly gay, which I'm assuming means to you that he's willingly turning his back to God .

He's gay. Of COURSE he's willingly turning his back mmmfffmmfmmffgggnggmmmffmmmpphmmmnnn!

Sorry, Ten... Couldn't resist a chance to lighten this turgid thread up a little

[/OT]