Darth Tater Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 I should argue that its Stalinism and totalitarianism whose fall we helped hasten, however it does still exist in China (politically) and CubaAs an economic system you are absolutley correct, however the Chineese, and Vietnameese are doing just fine under "communism" but with a capitlistic economy If you catch my drift there, we were not fighting the economic system of communism, but the totalitarianism of it What you have in China is more like facism or state capitalism. Cuba is really just a dictatorship and also seems to have many features of facism. The Soviet Union was really just a facist state from the mid-20s on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 What you have in China is more like facism or state capitalism. Cuba is really just a dictatorship and also seems to have many features of facism. The Soviet Union was really just a facist state from the mid-20s on. it would have been interesting if the original communist plan had worked out, and stalin hadnt taken power. i dont believe it would have worked out, but it probably would have been better for the russians and everyone else, but then again we might not be as technologically advanced if we hadnt seen russia as a threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 it would have been interesting if the original communist plan had worked out, and stalin hadnt taken power. i dont believe it would have worked out, but it probably would have been better for the russians and everyone else, but then again we might not be as technologically advanced if we hadnt seen russia as a threat. I don't see how resources wasted on war or the preparation for war somehow help technological advancement. Sure we spent a lot of resources on nuclear tech and space tech, but we also spent a lot on tanks, airplanes, ships, missiles, soldiers. And not much of that could be used to help improve our quality of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 I don't see how resources wasted on war or the preparation for war somehow help technological advancement. Sure we spent a lot of resources on nuclear tech and space tech, but we also spent a lot on tanks, airplanes, ships, missiles, soldiers. And not much of that could be used to help improve our quality of life. to advance military technology, u first have to discover new things and uses, and if u look back on history, almost all major technological advances were made first for military purposes. example jets-used for war, now used for transportation and helped lead into rocket tech and if you look at how life was before ww2, and life today how has our quality of life not improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 headhunter39, You have fallen for the broken window theory of history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 headhunter39,You have fallen for the broken window theory of history. :insane: and wht exactly is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 Jacksonians strongly support pure democracy, that is anything is right if the majority of the group supports it (does assume the group is them and most Jacksonians can't believe that the group may disagree with them if its sane). Think populism. They do like to control sufferage but as Bastiat shows, universal sufferage is BS. Wilsonians believe that it is the governments duty to run the world. Yeah, populism is definitely a trait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 :insane: and wht exactly is that? Not thinking about the unseen Read this essay Specifically this: public spending is always a substitute for private spending Doesn't exactly apply, but more people need to read Bastiat:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 Not thinking about the unseenRead this essay Specifically this: public spending is always a substitute for private spending Doesn't exactly apply, but more people need to read Bastiat:) i dont see how that essay relates to what i said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 now for something completely different...i had a thread that i made asking this, but noone ever replied. does anyone know where i can find redskins highlights or game clips, because im trying to make a movie, but i cant find a good site that i can get videos from the only place that i saw that had game highlights was redskinsnation.com, and i clicked on the download button, but i couldnt save it to my computer, which is what i need to do so i can import the video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted July 8, 2006 Share Posted July 8, 2006 i dont see how that essay relates to what i said Just because the military spent the resources via more taxation doesn't mean the private sectore (eveyone not in the government) wouldn't have used those same resources if there was no taxation (in the scope of just this point at the very least). I will admit that war does bring a drastic need which can sometimes stimulate inventive thought, but in the long run more resources are spent on the killing than the technological advancement. It is reasonable to assume that greater resources would be spent to advance human progress without war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 Just because the military spent the resources via more taxation doesn't mean the private sectore (eveyone not in the government) wouldn't have used those same resources if there was no taxation (in the scope of just this point at the very least).I will admit that war does bring a drastic need which can sometimes stimulate inventive thought, but in the long run more resources are spent on the killing than the technological advancement. It is reasonable to assume that greater resources would be spent to advance human progress without war. war speeds up the process of discovering new things and once war is over, those things are put to a more practical use. but there are many things that have been discovered in times of peace, but throughout history, war was the main reason for technological advances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 8, 2006 Author Share Posted July 8, 2006 It is reasonable to assume that greater resources would be spent to advance human progress without war. there is no way of knowing what we would or wouldnt have discovered in times of peace rather than war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurseReversed Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 here is a post I made a while ago about the PNAC Whether bush and admin purposely misled, was mislead, or a combination of the two is a matter of opinon at this point I certainly think that anything is possible as many facts point in both directions Personally I think its irrelevant anyways maybe its the utilitarian in me The question maybe we should ask is why he would mislead or misrepresent? for oil money and lucrative contracts? some might think this, but I seriously doubt that money alone drove his ambition others, more informed, might say that it's his administrations neo-con agenda ahh now theres an idea, take a look at this website, read thorougly please http://www.newamericancentury.org/ coincidence that the founding members contain alot of top bush admin names? Try going directly to the statement of principles link in the top right I think they overuse the word AMERICAN ("american leadership" "american interests" " american security") when GLOBAL could easily be substituted. The principles I do mostly agree with, the americanization of them I dont. The world will never accept american leadership only global leadership and not american values but universal democratic values. But like they say america is the only country fully capable of accomplishing such goals Do you agree even in part with their ideas? or not at all? The true debate boils down to these arugments IMO The first one strongly based on neo-con policy the second based on the belief that we should not be in iraq because our intelligence was wrong about them being an immenent threat and now that we realized that mistake we should get out as quickly as possible do you think we should be risking our neck and using all our resources trying to effect positive change in the world to assist future generations of peoples that might not even be american? Or do you think we should mind our own buisness and not medle in others affairs unless their is imminent danger? (which sometimes can be to late) all the rest if just filler imo I think you really have to spend a half hour or more reading through that site to get the true understanding. It does make sense. Like I said above they overuse the word american, when they could easily substitute Global. Most U.S. interests are synonymous with global interests and our leadership IS needed. Remember what we have here in the U.S. is really what everybody should have and sometimes you need to kick some ass to get the ball rolling. The crazier the dictator the more force > diplomacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 there is no way of knowing what we would or wouldnt have discovered in times of peace rather than war That is why you're use of 'might' in the original post makes the essay only apply inexactly. Any technology we'd have without that specific pressure, however, would probably be of a higher order or at least as good. In any case, the value would be much higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Force Cane Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 here's a clue: there is NO WAY that we solve the Iranian problem "diplomatically". Like the Mullahs are going to all of a sudden say: "you know what, the west has done a great job teaching us and is correct after all. we will now give up our nuclear bombs, give up our support for worldwide terrorism, give up our support for Hizbullah, Damascus, Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq." 1. Iran 2. Syria 3. Somalia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 Can't we just have world peace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 10, 2006 Author Share Posted July 10, 2006 there is NO WAY that we solve the Iranian problem "diplomatically". why cant we solve the iranian problem diplomactically? if their "president" (he was elected right? i forgot) is willing to send our president a letter explaining how our ideals different and why they hate us, then why couldnt we try to solve the issue? i guarentee u that going to war with iran wont help the situation at all. how will killing thousands more civilians end anti american sentiments? now if it comes down to it and they threaten to attack us then of course we'd have to invade, but they havent yet:2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter39 Posted July 10, 2006 Author Share Posted July 10, 2006 Can't we just have world peace? someones campaigning for miss america Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Force Cane Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 "any country on earth would be a fool to actually act preemtively against us" thank goodness then that Al-Qaeda isn't a country! You might want to tell the Japanese, Iranians and North Koreans.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.