I think we should nation build

[PureX]

I somewhat agree, yet not with the direction you head towards. and conclude they have a higher moral ground. All nations are lead by those who can lead, thus there is always some element of a power elite. The difference is we in a democracy attempt to place value on people, while in a theocracy, or monarchy, or aristocracy, that element of greed, manifested as power, tends to sway in the direction of what benefits those in power.

All forms of government require a "power elite", but history has shown that every "power elite" becomes corrupt, abusive, and exploitive of those it leads, pretty much immediately upon gaining power.

The solution to this problem, so far, has been to develop a set of principals that the power elite must follow, or risk replacement by the people they rule. And those principals have to be documented for all to recognize and understand. This method of government is called a constitutional democracy. And it lives or dies on the clarity, honesty, and practical viability of those founding documents.

In the case of the U.S., it was the first attempt, ever, in the history of humanity of this type of government, and it was attempted just prior to a massive technological revolution that completely changed the way human societies function (from an agrarian society to a techno-industrial society), so the founders did an understandably poor job writing those essential documents.

The Declaration of Independence was the most principled and broad-reachong of those documents, but it consisted of really only one applicable paragraph. And even that far outstripped the comprehension of the men who wrote it. The Constitution is a mess, that had to be amended almost immediately, and yet still remains confusing, vague, and barely functional.

The ideal, especially in a modern inter-dependent culture where most people have to gain employment to survive, is a constitutional democracy based on socialist principals, wherein the well-being of society trumps the right of individuals to gain as much for themselves as possible. We in the U.S. will never achieve that because we have already allowed an oligarchy to form that is so wealthy and powerful that it control what many of us think and believe, as well as all the meaningful levers of political and economic power. And they will not give up their wealth and power to allow us to re-establish a functioning socially responsible democracy.

So we are doomed.

But hopefully, as the future unfolds, humanity will take the lessons that can be learned from our first failed attempt, and use them to perfect a system that will finally succeed in enabling human beings to govern themselves to the benefit of all. And not just to the benefit of those power-hungry few among us that have always managed to take control and destroy the lives of everyone else. This has already happened in some of the European nations.

Here's to hoping ...

 

[Nick M]

False! there is no mandate for America to deploy every time there is injustice in the world,

I would rate what Adolph Hitler and Saddam Hussein did as more than an injustice. Although they were both unjust. Just like Obama.

 

[Ktoyou]

The funny thing is the power elite is not usually the stem of oppression, only in a material sense. It is usually the masses who uphold bigotry. If you are to argue that the prejudices of the masses stem from the rule of a power elite, then you are going to been more insight than what seems directly copied for a high school history book, as you stat above.

 

[PureX]

The funny thing is the power elite is not usually the stem of oppression, only in a material sense. It is usually the masses who uphold bigotry. If you are to argue that the prejudices of the masses stem from the rule of a power elite, then you are going to been more insight than what seems directly copied for a high school history book, as you stat above.

The power elite rely on the ignorance and fear of the masses to maintain their positions of power. It has always been this way. And this is how they have taken and maintain power in the U.S.

But when this country was established, a whole new idea was afoot. And that is the idea that the people ultimately have the power to depose the ruling elite if the ruling elite become abusive of their positions (as they always will, if they're allowed). And this idea was written into the founding documents of a new nation's government. Unfortunately, they were too vague, and too archaic to function properly in a modern, technological society, and so have not been followed in spirit or letter.

Our attempt has failed. And is failing all around us.

But it's been modified in some other countries, where it is working much better. And we can only hope that in time, this new method of governance will take hold and will truly change the history of humanity for the better.

The ignorance of the masses is the masses own worst enemy. And the power elite have always known this. If we want to be a free and healthy society, we MUST educate ourselves. And make sure that our children are well educated. And we will have to do this in spite of those in power who will prefer we remain ignorant, and in fear of each other, and we must do this in spite of our own ignorance and superstition and prejudice and fear.

 

[Ktoyou]

I would rate what Adolph Hitler and Saddam Hussein did as more than an injustice. Although they were both unjust. Just like Obama.

Hitler was a mad man, determined to rule, or destroy the would. Stalin was determined to manifest Lennon's dream of a collectivist state were the individual will was submerged by the state.

Obama is a man who is divided in his mind, part Muslim, yet cannot be, part collectivist, yet cannot, and partly confused by the nexus of white conservatives and black liberals, along with fascists amongst both. He cannot sit, the music must play out, or he may end up without a seat.

Clint Eastwood might have said Obama is a legend in his own mind. He surly would have taken Hitler and Stalin more seriously

 

[Ktoyou]

The power elite rely on the ignorance and fear of the masses to maintain their positions of power. It has always been this way. And this is how they have taken and maintain power in the U.S.

But when this country was established, a whole new idea was afoot. And that is the idea that the people ultimately have the power to depose the ruling elite if the ruling elite become abusive of their positions

Not really, that was said to King George, yet after the revolution many wanted George Washington to be king. I bet you never knew that?

There are far less an egalitarian society, at first, it was not until 1800 when Jefferson advocated the vote for the 'yeoman farmer' did more than a few have any say on the government.
Then came Jackson who was the first real democrat, yet Jackson did not feel blacks had any rights and women had not the brains for know politics. He had little reason to insist on universal suffrage.

You are feeding me tripe, and half baked at that. Study history before you expect others to think you know about it

 

[PureX]

Hitler was a mad man, determined to rule, or destroy the would. Stalin was determined to manifest Lennon's dream of a collectivist state were the individual will was submerged by the state.

Obama is a man who is divided in his mind, part Muslim, yet cannot be, part collectivist, yet cannot, and partly confused by the nexus of white conservatives and black liberals, along with fascists amongst both. He cannot sit, the music must play out, or he may end up without a seat.

Clint Eastwood might have said Obama is a legend in his own mind. He surly would have taken Hitler and Stalin more seriously

Obama is just weak. He occupies an office that has no real power. And he does nothing to agitate beyond the very limited political position in which he operates. He's a good political functionary, but he's no "leader of the people".

Blaming any of this on him is just ignorance. The exact kind of ignorance that the real power elite work so hard to keep us in.

 

[Nick M]

Obama is just weak. He occupies an office that has no real power.

Obama's office has all the power it needs when the RINOs give it to him. Which is all the time.

 

[Ktoyou]

Obama is just weak. He occupies an office that has no real power. And he does nothing to agitate beyond the very limited political position in which he operates. He's a good political functionary, but he's no "leader of the people".

Blaming any of this on his is just ignorance. The exact kind of ignorance that the real power elite work so hard to keep us in.

You are correct about Obama being not able to go much, yet he does have some power in the domestic sphere. I think it was a big mistake having a Muslin as president.

Obama is also part of that power elite yet he does not seem to ne able to leave the street of Chicago, and maybe that is because to do so means he would have to fave being as much a part of rural white Kansas as everyone else who had grown up there.

Too bad he is not a Hindu, then he could hope to come back to life as a Jeff Fort.

You do know who Jeff Fort is, don't you?

 

[PureX]

Not really, that was said to King George, yet after the revolution many wanted George Washington to be king. I bet you never knew that?

Yes, I did know that.

There are far less an egalitarian society, at first, it was not until 1800 when Jefferson advocated the vote for the 'yeoman farmer' did more than a few have any say on the government.

The founders themselves were the local ruling elite. They saw themselves as the downtrodden in relation to England, yet they were setting themselves us as the new ruling elite of a new nation in response to it. In this way, they were somewhat self-deluded, and that self-delusion has poisoned this nation ever since. The founders declared that all men were created equal, and yet kept men and women as slaves, and didn't recognize the near psychotic inconsistency in that. And this country has been wallowing in that psychotic inconsistency ever since. As we are still struggling to comprehend the idea of equality and freedom, and to live by it.

But this is just a part of the ignorance that "we the people" suffer from, and that is being perpetually exacerbated by the ruling elite so as to help them maintain their positions of power and wealth. There's more.

 

[ok doser]

Obama is just weak. He occupies an office that has no real power.

and yet you go on and on about that evil george "mcChimpy-hitler-cheney" Bush who did all this unjustified, illegal and immoral stuff when he held that office that "has no real power"


perhaps santa will bring you some intelligence for Christmas

 

[rocketman]

I would rate what Adolph Hitler and Saddam Hussein did as more than an injustice. Although they were both unjust. Just like Obama.

Was Saddam an imminent threat to the United States? I think not...was he evil? Yes, but is that criteria to spill American blood? All George Bush did by interfering there was destabilize the entire region and create a larger Shiite footprint for Iran by putting Shiites in charge of the Iraq. In retrospect everyone should be able to see the damage done by progressives from Bush through the Obama years, the middle east is far more dangerous now than it was before our presence....or at least that is my takeaway. Certainly the Obama administration has made a bad mistake worse, we all can all see that quite clearly...America can not project our democracy & values set on these savages.

 

[Ktoyou]

"America can not project our democracy & values set on these savages."
((( Rocketman)))

 

[PureX]

Was Saddam an imminent threat to the United States? I think not...was he evil? Yes, but is that criteria to spill American blood? All George Bush did by interfering there was destabilize the entire region and create a larger Shiite footprint for Iran by putting Shiites in charge of the Iraq. In retrospect everyone should be able to see the damage done by progressives from Bush through the Obama years, the middle east is far more dangerous now than it was before our presence....or at least that is my takeaway. Certainly the Obama administration has made a bad mistake worse, we all can all see that quite clearly...America can not project our democracy & values set on these savages.

Obama has had very little effect on this problem one way or another. You blame him simply because you want to, and because he is president while the situation continues to deteriorate. But in truth, once Bush and Cheney invaded with no reasonable exit strategy, and no sensible goal to achieve (except funneling huge amounts of tax money to the war industrialists and Cheney's pals at Halliburton), the course was set for a spiral into chaos, from which the most blood-thirsty extremists were bound to arise. What's been happening through the Obama administrations would have happened no matter who was president, and in fact, there is not one republican candidate today who offers any reasonable alternative course of action to the course we are now currently taking. They give lots of alternative lip service, and blame, but not one of them actually has an alternative plan.

Some problems, once they get started, just don't have a good or reasonable solution. At least not one that we can effect. Which is exactly why George Bush Sr. did NOT go after Saddam and his 'elite guard'. And why Bush Jr. never should have done so. But once the damage was done, there was no undoing it. And blaming it on Obama is just childish and pointless.

 

[rocketman]

Obama has had very little effect on this problem one way or another. You blame him simply because you want to, and because he is president while the situation continues to deteriorate. But in truth, once Bush and Cheney invaded with no reasonable exit strategy, and no sensible goal to achieve (except funneling huge amounts of tax money to the war industrialists and Cheney's pals at Halliburton), the course was set for a spiral into chaos, from which the most blood-thirsty extremists were bound to arise. What's been happening through the Obama administrations would have happened no matter who was president, and in fact, there is not one republican candidate today who offers any reasonable alternative course of action to the course we are now currently taking. They give lots of alternative lip service, and blame, but not one of them actually has an alternative plan.

Some problems, once they get started, just don't have a good or reasonable solution. At least not one that we can effect. Which is exactly why George Bush Sr. did NOT go after Saddam and his 'elite guard'. And why Bush Jr. never should have done so. But once the damage was done, there was no undoing it. And blaming it on Obama is just childish and pointless.

:blabla: Try as might to deny, or deflect, your imperial president has exacerbated an unstable situation in the middle east under the guise of democracy. Would you like me to list the mistakes he has made that made the problem worse?

* Pulling troops from Iraq creating a vacuum.
* Perpetuating the fallacy of the "Arab Spring" undermining leaders in the region that keep radical islamists at bay. Obama has been instrumental in the take down of petty dictators that keep the crazy jihadists under wraps : Momar Gadaffi, Hasni Mubarik, Abed Hadi, and presently trying to unseat Assad in Syria.
* Ignoring, even insulting our allies in the region while bolstering illegitimate regimes such as the muslim brotherhood & hamas.

There are many more factoids but, I hit the high points for you. Face it, your man has made a bad problem worse and caused the deaths of countless people surely in the hundreds of thousands, including American lives & one ambassador. Credit where credit is due, Obama is a very dangerous man.

 

[PureX]

Try as might to deny, or deflect, your imperial president has exacerbated an unstable situation in the middle east under the guise of democracy. Would you like me to list the mistakes he has made that made the problem worse?

* Pulling troops from Iraq creating a vacuum.

The American people would not have stood for leaving them there any longer, nor would they have stood for increasing their numbers. Nor, certainly, would they have stood for the additional costs of all this after our economy collapsed. The nation had had enough of the Bush-Cheney economic bamboozle, and the Iraq debacle, and we simply couldn't afford to spend hundreds of billions of more dollars on Iraq. It wouldn't have made any difference who was president. That invasion/occupation had to end. And thanks to Rumsfeld's utter incompetence, nothing had been achieved in terms of a functional Iraqi government and army to keep the country from falling into chaos as soon as we left. And NONE OF THIS WAS OBAMA'S FAULT.

If you think he could have kept spending trillions to keep our troops there for another half decade or so while we tried to install an Iraqi government and army that could successfully function without us, that's fine. But how do you imagine we were going to pay for all that when the republicans suddenly became extremely concerned with the giant national debt (because a democrat had been elected) that they'd spent the Bush years creating?

* Perpetuating the fallacy of the "Arab Spring" undermining leaders in the region that keep radical islamists at bay.

Obama does not own the media. And he did not organize nor inspire the various uprisings that occurred in the middle east. He simply enabled two of them once they started with weapons and information, as any republican president would have been clamoring to do. As the republicans, and Americans in general, are really big on the illusion of "spreading democracy" via violent revolution.

Obama has been instrumental in the take down of petty dictators that keep the crazy jihadists under wraps : Momar Gadaffi, Hasni Mubarik, Abed Hadi, and presently trying to unseat Assad in Syria.

"Instrumental" my hind end. He minimally supported two revolutions that were already happening, hoping that it might result in a more western-friendly regime change. The republicans would have done nothing different. And in fact they were supporting him, grudgingly, throughout it all.

* Ignoring, even insulting our allies in the region while bolstering illegitimate regimes such as the muslim brotherhood & hamas.

Those allies could use some insulting. We support them to the point of their being an enormous economic and military parasite.

There are many more factoids but, I hit the high points for you. Face it, your man has made a bad problem worse and caused the deaths of countless people surely in the hundreds of thousands, including American lives & one ambassador. Credit where credit is due, Obama is a very dangerous man.

You imagine without any sense or evidence that anyone else would have done anything different, and that if they had, things would somehow have magically worked out better. But the truth is that area of the world was coming apart at the seams regardless, thanks mostly to our invasion and occupation of Iraq, and to our 100 year legacy of installing ruthless dictators there to quell the populations while we exploited their nations for oil. All of this was set in motion long before Obama became president and will continue long after. And the truth is Obama didn't do anything much differently than any of the other presidents both democrat and republican over the last century. With the sad exception of George W. Bush, who attacked, invaded and occupied a foreign nation for no reason, with no exit strategy, and no goal. So the moment you start spitting venom at Obama, and you ignore the fact that he inherited a massive screw up from Bush, you expose your own irrational bias, and render yourself disingenuous.

 

[Nick M]

You are feeding me tripe, and half baked at that.

That is all he is good for.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

not many people seem to think we should have overthrown Saddam and all that

But i think we just didn't do it right. When we go in, we should just totally take over everything (to the winner go the spoils) and then, once there is no serious threat, we can hand things over

When Jimmy Carter overthrew the pro west/pro American Shah of Iran in favor of radical Islam, he helped build what we're seeing in the Middle East today.

Yes, we need to get pro American rulers back in power in the Middle East. Just don't think that they need our money (foreign aid) as well, cuz they don't.

 

[ok doser]

NONE OF THIS WAS OBAMA'S FAULT.

bammy's had seven years to effect change - remember that crap that you retards fell for? hope and change?

gee - who would have thought being president would be so difficult?

 

[Nick M]

Was Saddam an imminent threat to the United States?

Of course he was. And worse, he paid jihadists families to do damage that he couldn't. The only problem in Iraq is that the US left before Iraq could defend itself.

Abu Nidal is what is to be put in the search engine. Be careful with that googlebomb.

Documents recovered in Iraq proved that Iraq listed Bin Laden as an asset.

Which is why NSA Rice said this;

Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York. This is a great terrorist, international terrorist network that is determined to defeat freedom. It has perverted Islam from a peaceful religion into one in which they call on it for violence. And they're all linked. And Iraq is a central front because, if and when, and we will, we change the nature of Iraq to a place that is peaceful and democratic and prosperous in the heart of the Middle East, you will begin to change the Middle East....