america not invincible

Ian wrote:

and yet your country pays scant regard to climate change - you sit on your backside and pollute this land that you plan to hand over to your grandchildren. Sometimes you can be your own worst enemy.
<quoted text>

dear ms. ian thanks for your concern.Every thing OK in your space?

Yeshua wrote:

<quoted text>He should be in guantanamo !!

What des guantanamo have to do with him? He is a great leader, and a great person. I hope he is the next President.

does*

you're an idiot -he seems bright, intelligent and articulate...basically the opposite of Bush.

Yeshua wrote:

<quoted text>He should be in guantanamo !!

Ian wrote:

you're an idiot -he seems bright, intelligent and articulate...basically the opposite of Bush.
<quoted text>

"seems"

Yeshua wrote:

<quoted text>He should be in guantanamo !!

You're Rumsfeld, aren't you?! Stop pouting for petesake!

Yeshua wrote:

<quoted text>He should be in guantanamo !!

What about the traitorous Jew, Sen. Joe LIEberman?

Ian wrote:

you're an idiot -he seems bright, intelligent and articulate...basically the opposite of Bush.
<quoted text>

And clean,Joe Biden said he was clean,too. I could see myself maybe voting for Barrack IF the message he puts out has do-able ideas,and he just isn't another cookie cutter politician. Being the new kid on the block doesn't mean a free pass. And he will have to contend with Shrillary, who by all accounts is a hard case politician. Yet that very trait may be used against her. One can hope.

Green Zone wrote:

<quoted text>
What about the traitorous Jew, Sen. Joe LIEberman?

I like him !!!

PAZZ wrote:

<quoted text>
JBH, please pick up a dictionary once in awhile. The description you provided for fascism is the description for socialism.
Webster defines fascism as: rods bound about an axe, ancient roman symbol of authority]] a system of government characterized by dictatorship, belligerant nationalism, militarism.
So the rods around the axe symbolize many groups weilding power through a common goal(worldwide Islamic extremists)
A system of government characterized by dictatorship(the mullahs)
Belligerant nationalism, militarism (convert to islam or die, suicide bombing and killing of non combatents, Push Israel into the ocean) etc,etc.
So, yeah...Islamo-fascism fits.

The "many groups wielding power through a common goal" sounds like the fascist elements of communism. Make no mistake, it was never a defeated enemy. Communists, who are by nature atheists, and the mid-east religious freaks have one great thing in common, downfall of the US as their goal. Also, the ideology of the Islamists are in line with the Marxist theory of scientific socialism as the mullahs who really run Iran are experts in sciences. Religion is used to oppress and manipulate the masses. Associating the religion of Islam with the political label of fascist isn't accurate. While there may be elements of fascism within the religion (as there are in Christianity and other religions), the politics can't be described that way and is more socialistic in nature.
Khrushchev once said, "I can prophesy that your grandchildren in America will live under socialism. And please do not be afraid of that. Your grandchildren will not understand how their grandparents did not understand the progressive nature of a socialist society."
Although the Russian government was communist, their society was socialist in nature, but only in the sense of Marxist socialism as true communists despise any other form and see it as Utopian.

I am from the UK - thats my first impression - i have only seen and read a little about him that why i said 'seems'

Yeshua wrote:

<quoted text>"seems"

Veritas wrote:

<quoted text>
Nationalism is nationalism, no matter what the circumstance. Your explanations only serve to show that the means to nationalistic tyranny is varied and multiple, and best studied on a case by case basis. In the end the conclusion though is the same: Nationalists are nothing more than tyrants, and their supporters nothing more than deluded closet aristocrats, and weak-minded free-loaders.
The tree of liberty cannot be grafted to any host, or pruned into any form other than what the people of its land want it to take. Our own tree is in great danger, we should attend to its needs before any other matters. And the enemy that threatens it the most are not foreign, but domestic in source. The religious nut-job rapture fools are trying to poison liberty by irrigating it with their end-times kool-aid.

So you compare the nationalist Abraham Lincoln as being in the same mould as the nationalist Joseph Stalin?
Or maybe you meant Franklin Roosevelt as a nationalist had a similar agenda to Mao Tse Tung?

Better check yourself before you wreck yourself.

PAZZ wrote:

<quoted text>
So you compare the nationalist Abraham Lincoln as being in the same mould as the nationalist Joseph Stalin?
Or maybe you meant Franklin Roosevelt as a nationalist had a similar agenda to Mao Tse Tung?
Better check yourself before you wreck yourself.

I suspect you meant it as sarcasm, but I'll legitimately take up that argument as well.

Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpeus (sp?). FDR was a fascist/communist.

Ian wrote:

ok, that was a major terrorist attack by 12 guys buts thats all it was - no Country has attacked your soil apart from pearl harbour.
Since 9/11 you have been trying to find countries to attack to revenge what was an act by a small terrorist group - now greatly strengthened by your actions.
before 9/11 who funded the IRA terrorists when they were killing civilians including children.
<quoted text>

Ian, you forget the attacks by England and Canada on Washington DC and Philadelphia in the War of 1812, Damn near burnt our capitol to the ground.

These Muslim countries you speak of are hotbed
kitchens for many terrorist groups to cook up their fiendish attacks on US and other democracies interests around the world.

As to your final query, you must be infering the good Irish-Americans that were still trying to free their land of heritage from the English usurpers.

Ian wrote:

Barack Obama - the next president of the USA
first impressions are that he's bright, refreshing, intelligent, can hold a conversation and would do well on the world stage - all the things Bush should be but is not.
No doubt the media will try and dig up something about his past to dicredit him.

No, his fellow democrats and the President of Australia have already seen to the defamation thing.

Ian wrote:

and yet your country pays scant regard to climate change - you sit on your backside and pollute this land that you plan to hand over to your grandchildren. Sometimes you can be your own worst enemy.
<quoted text>

"British youngsters get worst deal, says UN"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...

I don't think that someone from the UK should be casting aspersions about the care of children. Looks to me that the UK has its own hands full with dealing with their own problems. Can we say "Chav Culture"? Blimey!

Got a problem with the USA, talk to Blair. Tony's sudden interest in global warming is just a smoke screen to divert attention from the cash-for-peerages investigation and his own involvement in Iraq.

What UK gross domestic and gross national product in 2006?... Roughly that of California. That's just one state out of 50.

As much as some in the UK would love to bash the Yanks, I don't see many refusing our money.

"The USA is Britain's largest single export market, taking 28.5bn Pounds of UK goods in 2004. The UK is the sixth biggest exporter to the US, after Canada, Mexico, China, Japan and Germany. The USA is also the leading overseas destination for British investment."

Ian, you still with me darling? A clue, get one, it's free. UK superiority complex towards America is a sad delusion. Get help, quick.

Dennis2 wrote:

<quoted text>
a) Obama is in fact Christian. Just because his father is a Muslim does not mean anything. If one cannot be a Christian after having a Muslim background, please explain to me what all of those Christian missionaries are trying to do converting Muslims?
b) Even if he was a Muslim....so what? There's nothing inherently wrong with Islam. Extremists Muslims do not define all Muslims.

you are out of your freakin mind! they are Muslims FIRST!a muslim to convert to Christianity means death!no muslim father is going to raise his son to be a christian ,he would be disowned!

Evil conservative wrote:

<quoted text>
you are out of your freakin mind! they are Muslims FIRST!a muslim to convert to Christianity means death!no muslim father is going to raise his son to be a christian ,he would be disowned!

Obama's Muslim father left when he was 2 years old so apparently there was no "conversion," just a choice made by a young man to become a Christian. But I suppose that isn't good enough for the "true Christians" as they are of course better somehow.

PAZZ wrote:

<quoted text>
So you compare the nationalist Abraham Lincoln as being in the same mould as the nationalist Joseph Stalin?
Or maybe you meant Franklin Roosevelt as a nationalist had a similar agenda to Mao Tse Tung?
Better check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Abe USED slavery as his cover story, and had his plan to exile the freed slaves to africa cut short by a slug to the head.
FDR provoked with the flying tigers(mercs aka "contractors"), then sacrificed the lives lost at Pearl Harbor, all to drag America into a war that the population wanted nothing to do with. You should check those nationalistic lies before you put them into your mouth, the informed among us know where they've been, and it ain't no place nice.

Veritas wrote:

<quoted text>
Abe USED slavery as his cover story, and had his plan to exile the freed slaves to africa cut short by a slug to the head.
FDR provoked with the flying tigers(mercs aka "contractors"), then sacrificed the lives lost at Pearl Harbor, all to drag America into a war that the population wanted nothing to do with. You should check those nationalistic lies before you put them into your mouth, the informed among us know where they've been, and it ain't no place nice.

ok....let's see if we get this right........although abe did explore repatriating blacks to africa and it was probably a good idea at the time......i have a problem with you claiming that a relatively small contingent of american pilots caused the japanese to attack american interests in the pacific. its apparent you have no idea about the world war in the pacific and its start.