Ce site requiert JavaScript pour fonctionner.
Veuillez activer JavaScript dans votre navigateur.
Thème Classic
Thème Thottbot
Weekly Debate #6: Team America, World Police
Répondre
Retourner à l'index
Publication par
MyTie
Corruption is a problem, I admit, but it's the job of the people to make sure that, if said entity is not working, let it be because of corruption or something else, we fix it.
So this is what North Koreans are doing wrong.... They just need to 'fix' thier government?
Publication par
MyTie
And what they decide is right is taken to be right.
Nope... not always.
When is it not?
So... all I have to do is point out one time the government hasn't acted on the majority opinion of the public? You make this too easy.
Publication par
Sagramor
Corruption is a problem, I admit, but it's the job of the people to make sure that, if said entity is not working, let it be because of corruption or something else, we fix it.
So this is what North Koreans are doing wrong.... They just need to 'fix' thier government?
The North Korean government is a dictatorship. Still, the purpose of any government is to be made by the people, for the people, their government isn't doing so, so they should. It's called revolution.
Publication par
MyTie
The North Korean government is a dictatorship. Still, the purpose of any government is to be made by the people, for the people, their government isn't doing so, so they should. It's called revolution.
A revolution? They can't even choose what they are going to have for dinner tonite, much less buy a gun, distribute fliers, have gatherings... etc. You're naive in thinking the UN couldn't become a dictatorship. You're naive in thinking that governments are easily 'fixed' by taking the power away in revolutions. The best solution here is prevention. Don't let them get the power to become a dictatorship. The answer is to have NO ONE with the most power. This is called 'separation of powers'. Read it. Learn it. Use it.
Publication par
TheMediator
All I know is that I'm glad that one political party got most of the power in the US and then proved that it was not a political party fit to run a country. Thank you George Bush.
Publication par
Sagramor
The North Korean government is a dictatorship. Still, the purpose of any government is to be made by the people, for the people, their government isn't doing so, so they should. It's called revolution.
A revolution? They can't even choose what they are going to have for dinner tonite, much less buy a gun, distribute fliers, have gatherings... etc. You're naive in thinking the UN couldn't become a dictatorship. You're naive in thinking that governments are easily 'fixed' by taking the power away in revolutions. The best solution here is prevention. Don't let them get the power to become a dictatorship. The answer is to have NO ONE with the most power. This is called 'separation of powers'. Read it. Learn it. Use it.
The UN is only supposed to interfere in international issues, and have the ultimate say in solving them. The UN is supposed to the be made by all countries, so that it isn't one sided.
Montesquieu's 3 powers are supposed to be used in national governing, not international.
Publication par
MyTie
All I know is that I'm glad that one political party got most of the power in the US and then proved that it was not a political party fit to run a country. Thank you George Bush.
Typical. I rarely hear a good arguement against Bush. War in Iraq was a mistake. He lied people died. WMDs aren't there man. These are all origional arguments, not built on opinions, conjecture, or biases at all.
Although I don't agree with George Bush's policies, I can think for myself. My criticism usually looks something more like this:
In his second term, George Bush implemented many policy restrictions on the border patrol, and failed to provide adequate lawful protection to the men and women doing that perolous job. As a result, the drug cartels had an easier time moving thier supplies over the border. Due to thier economic strength, Mexico is facing unprecidented violence at thier hands. We also are experiencing numerous social implications due to laxed control. One of these issues is the impact on our health care, which is forced to care for individuals who do not contribute to it in taxes.
These, and numerous other examinations into his presidency lead me to conclude that he was inept in his decision making processes.
Of course you could just spout the same garbage you hear over and over from TV. Society of sheep morons. Sheep have more intelligence.
Publication par
TheMediator
All I know is that I'm glad that one political party got most of the power in the US and then proved that it was not a political party fit to run a country. Thank you George Bush.
Typical. I rarely hear a good arguement against Bush. War in Iraq was a mistake. He lied people died. WMDs aren't there man. These are all origional arguments, not built on opinions, conjecture, or biases at all.
Although I don't agree with George Bush's policies, I can think for myself. My criticism usually looks something more like this:
In his second term, George Bush implemented many policy restrictions on the border patrol, and failed to provide adequate lawful protection to the men and women doing that perolous job. As a result, the drug cartels had an easier time moving thier supplies over the border. Due to thier economic strength, Mexico is facing unprecidented violence at thier hands. We also are experiencing numerous social implications due to laxed control. One of these issues is the impact on our health care, which is forced to care for individuals who do not contribute to it in taxes.
These, and numerous other examinations into his presidency lead me to conclude that he was inept in his decision making processes.
Of course you could just spout the same garbage you hear over and over from TV. Society of sheep morons. Sheep have more intelligence.
No, George Bush was just a major $%^&*!, and I knew that once he was out of office people would start calling him on his bull$%^&.
Publication par
MyTie
No, George Bush was just a major $%^&*!, and I knew that once he was out of office people would start calling him on his bull$%^&.
Indeed. I would challenge you to be specific, and call on well constructed arguements to back up your point, but I fear the strain of critical thinking may hurt your psyche.
Publication par
TheMediator
No, George Bush was just a major $%^&*!, and I knew that once he was out of office people would start calling him on his bull$%^&.
Indeed. I would challenge you to be specific, and call on well constructed arguements to back up your point, but I fear the strain of critical thinking may hurt your psyche.
Look, I can understand why you don't want to accept that your political party is basically just a bunch of rich guys trying to manipulate the masses to put their friends in power, but seriously, you need to face the truth eventually.
Publication par
MyTie
No, George Bush was just a major $%^&*!, and I knew that once he was out of office people would start calling him on his bull$%^&.
Indeed. I would challenge you to be specific, and call on well constructed arguements to back up your point, but I fear the strain of critical thinking may hurt your psyche.
Look, I can understand why you don't want to accept that your political party is basically just a bunch of rich guys trying to manipulate the masses to put their friends in power, but seriously, you need to face the truth eventually.
LOL. Im not registered Republican. Wanna try again at the critical thinking thing?
Publication par
TheMediator
No, George Bush was just a major $%^&*!, and I knew that once he was out of office people would start calling him on his bull$%^&.
Indeed. I would challenge you to be specific, and call on well constructed arguements to back up your point, but I fear the strain of critical thinking may hurt your psyche.
Look, I can understand why you don't want to accept that your political party is basically just a bunch of rich guys trying to manipulate the masses to put their friends in power, but seriously, you need to face the truth eventually.
LOL. Im not registered Republican. Wanna try again at the critical thinking thing?
I'm not registered Democrat either, but that doesn't mean I don't agree with the majority of the party's views. Fail evade IMO.
Publication par
MyTie
I'm not registered Democrat either, but that doesn't mean I don't agree with the majority of the party's views. Fail evade IMO.
So. I'll pitch it to you again, but this time nice N slow. This is attempt three. Please dont strike out...
Ok...
Here it comes....
Name a well thought out reason
why
George Bush's policies either failed or succeeded. State why or why not.
Publication par
TheMediator
Name a well thought out reason why George Bush's policies either failed or succeeded. State why or why not.
The $%^&ing economy. Even when the market started heading south he claimed that everything would work itself out and he didn't intervene... look where we are now. No, the free market doesn't just work. When individual profit is the end goal, you run into situations where people do things that #$%^ up the economy for themselves. Nothing more needs to be said about that.
Actually, pretty much everything he did was !@#$ed up, but the economy is the one that is more clearly visible that there's no possible way you could argue wasn't a total #$%^ up. The only thing that can possibly save his reputation is if Iraq becomes a stable ally of the United States. Otherwise, he's going to be remembered as one of the worst presidents ever.
Publication par
MyTie
Name a well thought out reason why George Bush's policies either failed or succeeded. State why or why not.
The $%^&ing economy. Even when the market started heading south he claimed that everything would work itself out and he didn't intervene... look where we are now. No, the free market doesn't just work. When individual profit is the end goal, you run into situations where people do things that #$%^ up the economy for themselves. Nothing more needs to be said about that.I can easily point out the shared policies of nearly the entire government. Just yesterday I was pointing out how Senator Schumer made specific actions which were conflicts of interest, bringing him and the people who worked for him monetary gain. These actions DID hurt the economy, and helped paint bad investment choices in wall street as high rated equity. In the end the american investor hurt because of this. While George Bush's policies DID hurt the economy, generally full blame cannot be pinned on him alone. I would say that MORE blame should go to congress in that case. The very people we elect into his place were perpetrators of equally bad choices. Although, in essence, you are right that he is partly to blame.
Actually, pretty much everything he did was !@#$ed up, but the economy is the one that is more clearly visible that there's no possible way you could argue wasn't a total #$%^ up. The only thing that can possibly save his reputation is if Iraq becomes a stable ally of the United States. Otherwise, he's going to be remembered as one of the worst presidents ever.
Ok, the rest of this arguement is pretty ambiguous flailing on your part. I think only 2 senators voted against the war in Iraq... 2 or 3 or something... not many. Although it was obviously a bad decision on his part, you aren't offering any alternative things he could have done, explained what was wrong about the decision to go to Iraq.
As far as 'one of the worst presidents ever'... I highly doubt it. John Adams is regarded as a pretty good president for his relations with france, and averting war, however the Sedition acts really drug him down at the time. All presidents have made thier mistakes. George Bush has not single handedly destroyed the nation, or anything near it... like James Buchanan did.
I think you have a narrow field of vision. I blame television.
Publication par
TheMediator
Name a well thought out reason why George Bush's policies either failed or succeeded. State why or why not.
The $%^&ing economy. Even when the market started heading south he claimed that everything would work itself out and he didn't intervene... look where we are now. No, the free market doesn't just work. When individual profit is the end goal, you run into situations where people do things that #$%^ up the economy for themselves. Nothing more needs to be said about that.I can easily point out the shared policies of nearly the entire government. Just yesterday I was pointing out how Senator Schumer made specific actions which were conflicts of interest, bringing him and the people who worked for him monetary gain. These actions DID hurt the economy, and helped paint bad investment choices in wall street as high rated equity. In the end the american investor hurt because of this. While George Bush's policies DID hurt the economy, generally full blame cannot be pinned on him alone. I would say that MORE blame should go to congress in that case. The very people we elect into his place were perpetrators of equally bad choices. Although, in essence, you are right that he is partly to blame.
Actually, pretty much everything he did was !@#$ed up, but the economy is the one that is more clearly visible that there's no possible way you could argue wasn't a total #$%^ up. The only thing that can possibly save his reputation is if Iraq becomes a stable ally of the United States. Otherwise, he's going to be remembered as one of the worst presidents ever.
Ok, the rest of this arguement is pretty ambiguous flailing on your part. I think only 2 senators voted against the war in Iraq... 2 or 3 or something... not many. Although it was obviously a bad decision on his part, you aren't offering any alternative things he could have done, explained what was wrong about the decision to go to Iraq.
As far as 'one of the worst presidents ever'... I highly doubt it. John Adams is regarded as a pretty good president for his relations with france, and averting war, however the Sedition acts really drug him down at the time. All presidents have made thier mistakes. George Bush has not single handedly destroyed the nation, or anything near it... like James Buchanan did.
I think you have a narrow field of vision. I blame television.
What did Bush do right? It would take me a while to type out almost every single thing he did and point out its wrongness, because its almost everything, besides like I said, if his invasion of Iraq happens to lead to it becoming a stable democracy and an ally of the US.
And against your point that he wasn't one of the worst presidents... we have a black man in the White House. You really honestly think he had a chance if it weren't for George Bush?
Publication par
MyTie
What did Bush do right? It would take me a while to type out almost every single thing he did and point out its wrongness, because its almost everything, besides like I said, if his invasion of Iraq happens to lead to it becoming a stable democracy and an ally of the US.
I beleive his actions did not have an overall positive implication. However, I forced you to explain why. I'm just sick of hearing "Bush Bash" without any conscious arguement.
And against your point that he wasn't one of the worst presidents... we have a black man in the White House. You really honestly think he had a chance if it weren't for George Bush?Yes. Yes I do.
Publication par
266586
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Publication par
TheMediator
What did Bush do right? It would take me a while to type out almost every single thing he did and point out its wrongness, because its almost everything, besides like I said, if his invasion of Iraq happens to lead to it becoming a stable democracy and an ally of the US.He prevented a second attack on U.S. soil, including an attack planned for Los Angeles which was prevented because of information gained through water boarding.
Do you have a link to a reliable news site about this? I'd be interested to read about this if this is actually true.
Publication par
135207
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Répondre
Vous n'êtes pas connecté. Veuillez vous
connecter
pour répondre à ce sujet, ou
vous inscrire
si vous n'avez pas déjà un compte.
