Another One For Fousto [Archive]

Camelopard

8th January 2010, 01:39

Mark in Oshawa

8th January 2010, 02:02

Who is on first?

http://www.internationalliving.com/Internal-Components/Further-Resources/quality-of-life-2010

"To produce this annual Index we consider nine categories: Cost of Living, Culture and Leisure, Economy, Environment, Freedom, Health, Infrastructure, Safety and Risk, and Climate. This involves a lot of number crunching from "official" sources, including government websites, the World Health Organization, and The Economist, to name but a few. We also take into account what our editors from all over the world have to say about our findings."

"For the fifth year running, France takes first in our annual Quality of Life Index. No surprise..............outweighed by an unsurpassable quality of life, including the world's best health care."

Anyway, apparently the UK comes in at 25, down from 20 last year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/6943343/Britains-quality-of-life-worse-than-former-Communist-countries.html

Full list here:

http://www1.internationalliving.com/qofl2010/

You cannot fly the French Flag Cam, you are in OZ and you are NOT fooling anyone...

AS for the list, I quibble with a lot of it really. I would like to see it defined and put in detail on how they get their numbers.

First off, giving the US a 62 for an enviromental score is just silly. Sorry, I am not buying it. They give the US a 92 on Freedom. Define that when in the US you have freedoms guarnteed in the constitution that other countries give and take away when they feel like it.

Canada gets a kick in the teeth for its climate, but if you LIKE winter ( there are people out there I hear who do) then it isn't a negative. As for Health Care, well we have all heard all the debate over THAT but the Americans have 2/3 of the Nobel Winners in medicine. Their private system funds more r and d in drug research, and that allows the rest of the world to buy those drugs. The Yanks are the fat rich guy buying the first new Gizmo for 20000 bucks that everyone else gets for less later on. Their medical system funds much of the R and D in the rest of the world so their numbers on health care will be skewed.

I am not saying they win in any case, but there is a lot of I have read in the last few months on this topic, and How you define some of the parameters on these studies can have a spin or political bent to them. Besides...I know where which is the best country to live in!!!! HERE in Canada!!!!

anthonyvop

8th January 2010, 02:53

harvick#1

8th January 2010, 03:09

lmao, how is our freedom 92?????? and just about everyone else is 100.

I can only say that our environment might be down is only because of all the major cities we have compared to everyone else in the world.

Camelopard

8th January 2010, 03:10

blah blah....bogus....blah blah...subjective.. blah blah....

France has more freedom than the US? Doesn't France have laws about keeping English words out of their language?

Maybe, but do the frenchies ban their citizens from visiting any other country in the world?

By the way, how is your mate 'bambi'? What a girlie name for an indicted bomb planting terrorist! :p

harvick#1

8th January 2010, 03:14

[quote="Camelopard"]Maybe, but do the frenchies ban their citizens from visiting any other country in the world? /QUOTE]

since when are we banned from visiting other countries?????

Eki

8th January 2010, 07:23

Another bogus, subjective survey.

France has more freedom than the US? Doesn't France have laws about keeping English words out of their language?
At least they don't have freedom fries. Naming fried potato chips as freedom fries makes mockery of real freedom.

Camelopard

8th January 2010, 07:49

Frenchies can also enjoy Cuban cigars without risk of penalty, regardless of where they are, with the possible exception of the US that is.

http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/cuba/ccigar2.pdf

quote: Transactions Involving Cuban-Origin Goods in Third Countries

"The question is often asked whether United States citizens or permanent resident aliens of the United States may

legally purchase Cuban origin goods, including tobacco and alcohol products, in a third country for personal use

outside the United States. The answer is no." unquote.

DexDexter

8th January 2010, 09:28

Another bogus, subjective survey.

France has more freedom than the US? Doesn't France have laws about keeping English words out of their language?

Why on on earth do they need to do that since 40% of the words in Oxford English dictionary are of French origin?

anthonyvop

8th January 2010, 14:12

Maybe, but do the frenchies ban their citizens from visiting any other country in the world?

Actually the French ban their citizens from leaving their country unless they have a passport and receive permission by passing through immigration.

The US has no such restrictions for it's citizens. Americans are free to travel anywhere they wish. So who is more free?

The Only restriction is that financial transactions are banned with certain countries. Any American can go to Cuba....You just can't spend any US currency.

anthonyvop

8th January 2010, 14:18

And France does not have freedom of speech
France prohibits material which is defamatory or insulting, or which incites discrimination, hatred, or violence against a person or a group of persons on account of place of origin, ethnicity or lack thereof, nationality, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or handicap.

The law also prohibits declarations that eulogize war crimes and crimes against humanity and those that deny crimes against humanities, as defined by the statutes International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg, committed by individuals or organizations convicted for these crimes by this tribunal, French or foreign courts (e.g. the Jewish Holocaust).

As disgusting as some speech might be I defend the right for a person to say it.

So tell me again how France has more Freedom than the US?

Brown, Jon Brow

8th January 2010, 15:04

Freedom in France? A country with well known religious intolerance.

Mark in Oshawa

8th January 2010, 19:36

I said it before, who did the study and what criteria did they use to judge it? I wasn't buying it and the more I looked, the number of things not making sense just grew. Then I looked, and the study was done by a magazine catering to Brits wanting to live abroad. I just don't take it too seriously. The US has a lot of faults and great things. It is truly unique in the world for how it views democracy vs the nations of western Europe for the most part, but I will not buy Germany having a superior ecological number when most of the former East Germany was run by people who thought nothing of toxic waste and ecological destruction for 50years

Eki

8th January 2010, 20:43

The US has no such restrictions for it's citizens. Americans are free to travel anywhere they wish. So who is more free?

Except no country allows you in without a passport, so there you are stuck at the airport. Plus many want to blow you up when you're in an airplane.

Drew

8th January 2010, 23:40

anthonyvop

9th January 2010, 00:08

Since when have Americans been freely allowed to go to Cuba? :s : They have to sneak in via other countries.

Ignorance is bliss for you I guess. Did you know there are daily flights from Miami to Havana.

Any American can go to Cuba. They just cannot use US currency. That precludes using the Airport(Fees&Taxes) and Marinas(Docking Fees& Taxes).

Now if you want to swim over be my guest.

Many Americans go to Cuba on Art/Cultural exchanges, business meeting, educational groups and news gathering groups. Funny thing is many get denied tourist or visitor's Visas by the Cuban Government. Seems the Cuba isn't too keen on having too many Americans on their shores spreading counter-revolutionary thoughts like freedom of speech and free elections.

Easy Drifter

9th January 2010, 02:39

Maybe it is because US citizens can go anywhere but cannot get back into the US without a US passport? :eek: :D

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 15:33

Since when have Americans been freely allowed to go to Cuba? :s : They have to sneak in via other countries.

Plus, have these people who do these surveys ever lived in these countries? They're all a load of bull

Americans have always had the option of going to Cuba, but no American Airline or any other would make any money with a daily flight to Havana since most Americans just assume they cant go. I do know this much. Canadians go there all the time, and since I have met a lot of people who have gone there, I can assure you that the country is a dichotomy. The tourist villas and hotels are out of the 1st world, and most of the rest of the country and its infrastructure either hasn't been touched since Castro took power; or looks like the Russians built it with all their customary lack of care and concern.

IN short....Cuba sadly isn't the country it should be, and THAT isn't the fault of the US....

Eki

9th January 2010, 15:42

IN short....Cuba sadly isn't the country it should be, and THAT isn't the fault of the US....
Isn't it? They backed Batista instead of Castro. Castro turned to the Soviet Union after the US turned him down. The Soviets were glad to help. It's like Finland had to turned to the Nazi Germany for help against the Soviets after the US and the UK had refused to help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro#Political_beginnings

During this period Castro repeatedly denied being a communist.[49][50][51][52][53] For example in New York on April 25 he said, "...[communist] influence is nothing. I don't agree with communism. We are democracy. We are against all kinds of dictators... That is why we oppose communism."[54]

Between April 15 and April 26, Castro and a delegation of industrial and international representatives visited the U.S. as guests of the Press Club. Castro hired one of the best public relations firms in the United States for a charm offensive visit by Castro and his recently initiated government. Castro answered impertinent questions jokingly and ate hot dogs and hamburgers. His rumpled fatigues and scruffy beard cut a popular figure easily promoted as an authentic hero.[55] He was refused a meeting with President Eisenhower. After his visit to the United States, he would go on to join forces with the Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev.[44]

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 15:53

Isn't it? They backed Batista instead of Castro. Castro turned to the Soviet Union after the US turned him down. The Soviets were glad to help. It's like Finland had to turned to the Nazi Germany for help against the Soviets after the US and the UK had refused to help.

Castro took power in 1959. TOOK IT AT THE POINT OF A GUN. He had millions in aid from the Russians, and every other western nation outside of the US has invested in the country where they were allowed to. Yet most of the Country is still a dump. Don't be blaming the US on that one Eki. Castro lives VERY well while most of the nation got excited when he bought them all rice cookers a few years back. The Soviets were in on this deal from the word go and that is why the US were objecting, not out of any love for Batista. Is the US embargo silly? YA, it is....but if Cuba is a dump, that isn't the fault of the US, it is Castro's country and he chose to run it as a island prison for the people living there... You don't see people floating southward from Miami looking for "Freedom" on pieces of jetsam and flotsam, but you sure read and see about people willing to die to get out of Cuba....

anthonyvop

9th January 2010, 16:11

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 16:24

Eki, If Fidel Castro had the courage of his conviction that he thinks all the Cuban people love him, he could have had an open and free election and put it to the test and GOTTEN that trade with the US. The US never has had an embargo of trade with any nation with a democratically elected government. Read "1984" and then tell me Castro isn't using the "threat" of the US as his pretence for the iron fisted grip he keeps on his people. Is there no end to the stupidity you are willing to swallow to blame the US for the world's Ills?

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 16:28

Eki, in that link you gave us here is a paragraph that says much about what Castro became:

"During 1948, Castro was twice linked to political assassinations.[3] He was suspected of Manolo Castro's assassination that took place on February 22.[3] University policeman Oscar Fernandez was killed in front of his own home on June 6. Dying Oscar Fernandez and other witnesses identified Castro as the assassin.[3] The incident passed.[3] In 1948, Castro joined an anti-American demonstration trip to Bogotá, Colombia, paid by Argentinean army colonel and President Juan Perón.[3] Castro joined mob violence and property destruction, and later sought refuge in the Argentinean embassy.[3]"

Anti-American Demonstration. Castro. A participant. Linked to assassinations.

Just a democrat to be respected eh Eki?

Have any other dictators you feel like defending today???? How about a good discussion on how Hitler was kind to dogs? Maybe another gripping defense of how Saddam enhanced the art's community in Baghdad? Maybe tell us how Mao was a great guy to all the children? You really have zero credibility...

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 17:14

anthonyvop

9th January 2010, 19:05

Eki also seems to miss the part about the US cutting of aid to Batista as well, After that happened it was just a matter of time.

But what are facts when Eki has a good anti-American rant?

Easy Drifter

9th January 2010, 19:52

Eki has never seen a left wing dictatorship he didn't like.

Eki

9th January 2010, 20:40

The US never has had an embargo of trade with any nation with a democratically elected government.
Iran has more or less a democratically elected government.

It's also interesting how the US doesn't have any problems to cooperate with dictators it sees as usful. Stalin and Saddam before 1980's are good examples. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan can't be said to be too democratic either. So I don't see why they couldn't cooperate with Castro. They couldn't find any use for him?

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 20:49

Iran has more or less a democratically elected government.

WELLL.....If you believe that I can sell you swampland in Florida. One, many people inside Iran thought there was massive voter fraud. TWO, no one can run unless they are "approved" by the Imams who in the end keep everyone else in line.

IN theory, Iran is a democracy. In practice? Nope....maybe more so than say Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait, but Amnesity International and other respectiable human rights organizations who hold no political bias have criticized Iran in the past for their human rights record and their "elections".

As I have said more than once Eki, The acid test is: Would you want to live there, climate, job and infrastructure taken out of the consideration? Is the country's government going to treat you the citizen with respect? There isn't ONE member of this forum who would volunteer to live in Iran, you included.....

edv

9th January 2010, 20:58

Iran has more or less a democratically elected government.

HA HA HA HA HA!

I can confidently assure you that, the last time I visited Iran, the vast majority of the fine people I met there would join me in laughter at your post.

Eki

9th January 2010, 21:00

WELLL.....If you believe that I can sell you swampland in Florida.
Where would anthonyvop live then?

TWO, no one can run unless they are "approved" by the Imams who in the end keep everyone else in line.

So? Nobody who wasn't approved by the US could run in the so called "free elections" in Iraq and Afghanistan either.

As I have said more than once Eki, The acid test is: Would you want to live there, climate, job and infrastructure taken out of the consideration? Is the country's government going to treat you the citizen with respect? There isn't ONE member of this forum who would volunteer to live in Iran, you included.....
No, I wouldn't want to live there, but somebody does. I wouldn't want to live in the US either, maybe not even in Canada, but somebody does.

anthonyvop

9th January 2010, 22:19

Where would anthonyvop live then?
What you call swampland I call waterfront property.

So? Nobody who wasn't approved by the US could run in the so called "free elections" in Iraq and Afghanistan either.
Not true. Qualifications were lai8d down by both the Iraqi and Afghani Governments. In fact some real losers got elected.

No, I wouldn't want to live there, but somebody does. I wouldn't want to live in the US either, maybe not even in Canada, but somebody does.
The vast majority of people on this planet do. I don't see tens of thousands of people risking their lives to enter Finland.

anthonyvop

9th January 2010, 22:20

Iran has more or less a democratically elected government.

I will give you a chance to rethink that statement.

Eki

9th January 2010, 22:33

The vast majority of people on this planet do. I don't see tens of thousands of people risking their lives to enter Finland.
Tens of thousands of people are not the vast majority. The vast majority requires at least 3.5 billion people.

Eki

9th January 2010, 22:46

Not true. Qualifications were lai8d down by both the Iraqi and Afghani Governments. In fact some real losers got elected.

Saddam for one couldn't run, except for his life.

I don't see tens of thousands of people risking their lives to enter Finland.
General Adolf Ehnrooth, a WW2 hero used to say "Finland is the best place on earth to live. For us Finns". I'm sure the US is the best place on earth to live, for you Americans, and Iran is the best place on earth to live for Iranians.

Mark in Oshawa

9th January 2010, 23:28

Tens of thousands of people are not the vast majority. The vast majority requires at least 3.5 billion people.

I would live in Finland Eki, but I wouldn't agree with everything there any more than I agree with everything the US does, or Canada does, or the UK does. My point is Eki, that you wouldn't WANT to live in Finland if the regime running the country was providing the system and choices that the Iranian government does. As per usual, you split hairs to hide the fact you are trying to defend essentially a dictatorship.

As for where Tony would live, I am sure he isn't buying up the Everglades and calling it waterfront property. That said, lots of swamps in Florida to sell you Eki...some Tony wouldn't want..lol

anthonyvop

10th January 2010, 04:08

Tens of thousands of people are not the vast majority. The vast majority requires at least 3.5 billion people.
3.5 Billion is a low figure. I would say about 5 billion would jump at the chance to emigrate to the US......including a large percentage of Finns. including a few famous ones.

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 04:13

3.5 Billion is a low figure. I would say about 5 billion would jump at the chance to emigrate to the US......including a large percentage of Finns. including a few famous ones.

I don't know if it is quite that high, but I will say a lot of that number would come to a lot of places they are not now....

Easy Drifter

10th January 2010, 05:52

Both the US and Canada have problems with illegal immigrants and phoney refugee claimants. People who want in by any means.
I don't believe Finland has that problem.

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 06:48

Both the US and Canada have problems with illegal immigrants and phoney refugee claimants. People who want in by any means.
I don't believe Finland has that problem.

They might. Then again, maybe not. I do know this much Drifter. If I couldn't live in Canada, Finland would only be disqualified because Iam lousy at learning languages and the weather is as bad as ours!!! The women there tho...hubba hubba....

Tomi

10th January 2010, 10:19

I would say about 5 billion would jump at the chance to emigrate to the US......including a large percentage of Finns. including a few famous ones.

I would not be so sure about that, during the years there has been about 80-100 Finnish hockey players doing their carreer in us, how come have not a single one stayed there to live after their carreer?

Easy Drifter

10th January 2010, 10:22

Eki is right.
Iran has a more or less democratically elected Govt.
Much much less than more! :D

Tomi

10th January 2010, 10:26

Both the US and Canada have problems with illegal immigrants and phoney refugee claimants. People who want in by any means.
I don't believe Finland has that problem.

We have offcourse, even we dont advert immigration on internet and so on.

Eki

10th January 2010, 11:50

My point is Eki, that you wouldn't WANT to live in Finland if the regime running the country was providing the system and choices that the Iranian government does.
Probably not, but that's because I have been brought up in a different society and belief system than Iranians are. If I had been born and raised in Iran as Iranian, I might actually want to live in that kind of system. I mean, the system in Iran must have a large support there, otherwise it wouldn't exist.

anthonyvop

10th January 2010, 14:41

Iran has more or less a democratically elected government.

Still waiting for you to explain that one!

anthonyvop

10th January 2010, 14:42

I mean, the system in Iran must have a large support there, otherwise it wouldn't exist.

You do realize how illogical that statement is don't you?

Eki

10th January 2010, 16:09

Still waiting for you to explain that one!

Easy Drifter already explained it. Except he may have exaturated the less part.

Can you now explain why you think that 5 billion people would like to move to the US?

Eki

10th January 2010, 16:13

You do realize how illogical that statement is don't you?
No. Enough Iranians didn't like the Shah and the Americans, so they threw them out. If enough Iranians didn't like the current regime, the would throw them out as well.

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 20:55

No. Enough Iranians didn't like the Shah and the Americans, so they threw them out. If enough Iranians didn't like the current regime, the would throw them out as well.

Sure...get right on that. It took 3 decades and a lot of foreign agitators to get rid of the Shah. You think the current Islamic regime doesn't know how they got rid of the Shah and knowwhat to look for to nip any rebellion from getting serious?

Eki...they tried doing it democratically and it didn't happen. Funny...here you are talking like you respect democracy, but you saw nothing wrong with Saddam Hussein's reign of terror?

Iran is one of the least free and oppressive countries on many levels going. The Shah was far more forgiving of the presence of a secular middle class than the Imam's are. He was a thug too, but he didn't control the culture of the nation in the same manner as the Islamic government does. They STONE people to death for crimes of adultry (provided they are female) still. This is NOT a nice place Eki.....Again, would you live there? If I banned you from Finland, I suspect Iran would be about 150th on your list...so quit with the fiction the people there are happy.

Eki

10th January 2010, 21:08

This is NOT a nice place Eki.....Again, would you live there?
If I was a Muslim and supported the Iranian system, I might.

I remember a poll made in Iraq after the invasion. Iraqis were asked what kind of democracy they'd prefer. The result and ranking was this:

1. Iranian type democracy
2. Saudi Arabian type democracy
3. Western type democracy

Eki

10th January 2010, 21:16

Eki...they tried doing it democratically and it didn't happen. Funny...here you are talking like you respect democracy, but you saw nothing wrong with Saddam Hussein's reign of terror?

Iran is one of the least free and oppressive countries on many levels going. The Shah was far more forgiving of the presence of a secular middle class than the Imam's are.

Saddam Hussein was more forgiving of the presence of a secular middle class and Christians than the Iraqi Imam's are.

BTW, have I said I didn't see anything wrong with Saddam Hussein's reign of terror? It's just about what is the alternative. We don't live in a perfect world where every option is open to everyone. I'm not in favor of child labor either, but I believe it's in some cases better than if the children have to sell sex and do crimes instead to survive.

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 21:22

If I was a Muslim and supported the Iranian system, I might.

I remember a poll made in Iraq after the invasion. Iraqis were asked what kind of democracy they'd prefer. The result and ranking was this:

1. Iranian type democracy
2. Saudi Arabian type democracy
3. Western type democracy

Iranian type democracy? That is what they have and yet the students are demonstrating in the streets in a country were free speech is monitored and people disappear for being too vocal. THAT isn't a democracy. Furthermore, if the Imams have to sign off on your candidacy, THAT isn't democracy either.

A Western democracy they know NOTHING about except what they are told...and I would love to know who calls anything about the Saudi Arabians democratic? The place is run by the royal family and there is no vote.

IN short, utter twaddle Eki...

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 21:27

Saddam Hussein was more forgiving of the presence of a secular middle class and Christians than the Iraqi Imam's are.

BTW, have I said I didn't see anything wrong with Saddam Hussein's reign of terror? It's just about what is the alternative. We don't live in a perfect world where every option is open to everyone. I'm not in favor of child labor either, but I believe it's in some cases better than if the children have to sell sex and do crimes instead to survive.

He liked the secular middle class that his sons would pick out a good woman on the street and make them disappear. He would borrow them. He put up with Christians because he feared the religious fanatics more. The Christians would never be a threat to his power.

AS for you not being in favour of children working, that is good but I fail to see how you can condone the practice of selling sex or crimes to survive. IT is all intolerant. I too live in the real world, but unlike you, I rail against TRUE injustice, and I don't think in any case a child should have to sell themselves or commit a crime. Sorry, It isn't better in any fashion short of death, and I would never phrase it that way. I know you don't approve of these practices, but your point leads me to believe you would give up large parts of your morality just to appease an outside force.

Live Free or Die...it is on the New Hampshire State License plates and I am sure it isn't part of your mantra Eki, but put me down being more inclined to agree with that way of thinking. Freedom is pretty much the only way the human race improves...

Eki

10th January 2010, 22:00

AS for you not being in favour of children working, that is good but I fail to see how you can condone the practice of selling sex or crimes to survive.
What?? How do I condone selling sex or crimes to survive? You'd let the children die instead?

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 22:08

What?? How do I condone selling sex or crimes to survive? You'd let the children die instead?

Neither one of us condone the practice. The difference is I would be wanting to intervene to stop it, you would say how horrible it all is and leave them to it.....

Eki

10th January 2010, 22:09

He liked the secular middle class that his sons would pick out a good woman on the street and make them disappear. He would borrow them.
The secular women were maybe free game for him and his sons, but now they are free game for everyone, so are liquor store owners. The rate of rapes and attacks on women have gone up.

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 22:12

The secular women were maybe free game for him and his sons, but now they are free game for everyone, so are liquor store owners. The rate of rapes and attacks on women have gone up.

Yes..but that isn't state sponsored rape. With a bit of time, the government there will get a handle on the crime. You are safe in a prison, but it is after all still a prison Eki.

You trade safety for freedom almost every time, which makes you a socialist. I trade Freedom for safety, and then endeavour to move it to the middle ground. That makes me a moderately conservative person.

Eki

10th January 2010, 22:15

I too live in the real world, but unlike you, I rail against TRUE injustice,
Yet you defend the winner takes it all, every man for himself type of cut-throat capitalism.

Mark in Oshawa

10th January 2010, 22:46

Yet you defend the winner takes it all, every man for himself type of cut-throat capitalism.

NO I haven't. You have me mistaken with Tony obviously. I just have more faith in the common man to get on with his life and succeed wihtout government telling him how much they need to be in his/her life. You would let the government do everything, I would just soon they provide a miltary, collect a flat tax, and use their regulatory ability to keep capitalism within a boundry that benefits everyone with.ut stifling it. I am for more balance than you would advocate...

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 01:17

Easy Drifter already explained it. Except he may have exaturated the less part.

Waiting for YOU to explain to me how Iran is a Democracy.

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 02:10

Waiting for YOU to explain to me how Iran is a Democracy.

He hasn't. See, they have a vote, and he thinks that is enough. God forbid a world run by a bunch of Eki's.....

Valve Bounce

11th January 2010, 02:45

A high for France: Gotta be the French Alps and Trois Valle in particular.

A low for France: branding one of their white wines "KIWI"

Camelopard

11th January 2010, 05:46

He hasn't. See, they have a vote, and he thinks that is enough............

I don't understand all this stuff about 'democracy' being the 'be all and end all' of everything.

You always criticise a lot of countries that don't follow your line of thought on a 'western style democracy'.

I have yet to see you make any criticism of the one party state that is Singapore, is there 'democracy' there if you are non ethnic Chinese? Go to Singapore and express you displeasure of the ruling party and in particular anything criticism of Lee kuan yew or his family in print and see what happens.

http://yoursdp.org/

Democracy in Fiji if you aren't a native Fijian? Not anymore.

The Tamils don't think there is much 'democracy' in Sri Lanka.

Malaysia, fine if you are a malay, bad luck if you are from any other ethnic background.

Indonesia? 'democracy' in West Papua in particular, don't make me laugh!

'Democracy' in Turkey if you are a Kurd?

Southern Africa, please tell me you were not in favour of apartheid in the former Rhodesia or SA. I'm not talking about conditions now with 1 person 1 vote (what a novel concept!). I'm talking about 30 plus years ago when blacks didn't have the vote. Don't go on about what Mugabe is doing now, we all know he is a clown, but if your view of 'democracy' in Iraq is to be followed then Mugabe is right.

Democracy in Kenya? have you read anything about how Kenyan politics is divided along tribal lines?

Modern Russia a 'democracy?

'Democracy' in Burma, or for that matter read anything about 'democracy' in Cambodia, was the former South Vietnam a democracy?

is there real 'democracy' in israel for Palestinians, again don't make me laugh.

I could go on and on, you have to realise that 'your' view of a 'western style democracy' isn't fit for every country in the world.

As for Iran stoning people to death, do you have a valid link please, did you know that the torah permits stoning, how is this 'good' and the koran bad ?

Just as an aside is stoning someone to death a less humane way of executing a person compared to frying them in an electric chair?

http://www.ccadp.org/botchedx.htm and http://joesbotchedexecutions.blogspot.com/

Lot's of food for thought!

Eki

11th January 2010, 06:46

Waiting for YOU to explain to me how Iran is a Democracy.

They have parliamental elections and presidential elections. They even have guaranteed seats in the parliament for religious minorities like the Jews.

Democracy is voting how you want to vote, not how the US wants you to vote.

Now, I'm waiting for YOU to explain why you think 5 billion people would like to emigrate to the US.

DexDexter

11th January 2010, 11:07

The vast majority of people on this planet do. I don't see tens of thousands of people risking their lives to enter Finland.

:D Boy are you living in a dream world. I'm pretty sure that if you asked Europeans how many would like to live in the US, you'd be pretty surprised about the result. If you asked them how many of them would like to live in the US outside New York the result would be even more surprising for you.

By the way, do you know how many illegal immigrants try enter the EU every year? The number is huge.

3.5 Billion is a low figure. I would say about 5 billion would jump at the chance to emigrate to the US......including a large percentage of Finns. including a few famous ones.

How much do you know about Finland? Ever visited the place? Ever visited in Europe?

Both the US and Canada have problems with illegal immigrants and phoney refugee claimants. People who want in by any means.
I don't believe Finland has that problem.

No offense but again, this shows a total lack of knowledge about things outside your world. Compare to us Europeans, I don't see me or anybody else stating "facts" about Canada and US without any knowledge of the subject.

Camelopard

11th January 2010, 11:14

.........By the way, do you know how many illegal immigrants try enter the EU every year? .....

Exactly and he has no idea of the number of illegal immigrants that try and reach Australia by boat, quite often with the help of the indonesian government, or at least their agencies........... (but that is ok because the indos are good guys and they are on 'our' side! Ho hum.

Easy Drifter

11th January 2010, 11:30

Dex: Sorry. I was going by the number of people I saw as immigrating to Finland when I looked it up some time ago.
You must be handling it better than we are because we get many thousand illegals and phoney refugee claimants every year.

DexDexter

11th January 2010, 11:32

Eki

11th January 2010, 11:47

Dex: Sorry. I was going by the number of people I saw as immigrating to Finland when I looked it up some time ago.

Wasn't that just the ones who were accepted?

odykas

11th January 2010, 13:33

I'm surprised Finland is not number 1 this time :p :

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 15:50

They have parliamental elections and presidential elections. They even have guaranteed seats in the parliament for religious minorities like the Jews.

WRONG!

Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: \di-ˈmä-krə-sē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural de·moc·ra·cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos + -kratia -cracy
Date: 1576

1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

Democracy is voting how you want to vote, not how the US wants you to vote.
So you are disagreeing with you own statement? How can an a Iranian vote how they want to?

Eki

11th January 2010, 16:36

So you are disagreeing with you own statement? How can an a Iranian vote how they want to?
They have elections where they can vote the candidate they want to vote. And the US isn't involved in them, at least not yet.

They can even protest and have demonstrations if the candidate of their choice doesn't win, like we saw in the latest presidential elections. And those elections were at least as honest and fair as the US presidential elections in 2000.

Brown, Jon Brow

11th January 2010, 16:59

:erm:

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 17:13

They have elections where they can vote the candidate they want to vote. And the US isn't involved in them, at least not yet.

They can even protest and have demonstrations if the candidate of their choice doesn't win, like we saw in the latest presidential elections. And those elections were at least as honest and fair as the US presidential elections in 2000.

Are you serious? Really? Did you forget your meds or something?

In what alternative universe do the Iranian people have the opportunity to vote for the candidate they want?

In what land of rainbow and unicorns do the Iranian people have the right to protest the elections without fear of violent reprisal?

Eki, For goodness sakes.....step away from the bong.

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 17:14

Iranians are free to vote for who they wish in an election. Its the threat of being murdered, and tortured by their present government which tends to sway their opinion. Clever tactics though I'll give then that.. :p

Actually they don't.

They can vote for who they wish from a list of Government approved candidates then they are murdered and tortured.

Eki

11th January 2010, 17:23

They can vote for who they wish from a list of Government approved candidates.
So can you. In the US prisoners aren't even allowed to vote, let alone be a candidate. And the US has most prisoners per capita in the world! You call that freedom?

Oh, and in the recent elections in Iraq and Afghanistan the locals could only vote a list of Government approved candidates, THE US GOVERNMENT APPROVED, and some call them countries!

then they are murdered and tortured.

Not true.

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 18:18

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 18:24

Hey Eki! Say helo to Mr. Kettle!

I see you can't vote in Finland either. Seems that convicted Felons cannot vote in your country for up to 7 years after imprisonment. That is almost as bad as the US where only certain sates ban convicted felons from voting and even those states allow for a hearing to restore voting rights(Which is almost always granted)

Eki

11th January 2010, 18:35

Hey Eki! Say helo to Mr. Kettle!

I see you can't vote in Finland either. Seems that convicted Felons cannot vote in your country for up to 7 years after imprisonment.
I didn't claim Finland was the only true democracy in the world and snub the Iranian democracy. I'd bet that in every country only eligible (= approved by the government) candidates can run in elections.

At least, unlike in Iraq and Afghanistan, they only have to be approved by our own government, not by the US. I have as little respect for the current Iraqi and Afghan governments as I have for the Terijoki Government of 1939-1940:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Democratic_Republic

The Finnish Democratic Republic (Finnish: Suomen kansanvaltainen tasavalta, Swedish: Demokratiska Republiken Finland) was a short-lived government dependent on, and recognised only by, the Soviet Union. It operated in those parts of Finnish Karelia that were occupied by the Soviet Union during the Winter War. The regime was also known under the name of the Terijoki Government (Finnish: Terijoen hallitus), as Terijoki was the first town to be "liberated" by the Red Army. The Soviet Union argued that it was the only rightful government for all of Finland that was capable of ending the Winter War and restoring peace. However, before the end of the war, the Soviets gave up this interpretation to make peace with the Republic of Finland's government.

Captain VXR

11th January 2010, 18:42

The quality of life survey is utter cr@p. Why?
Apparently North Korea is a better place to live in than the Emirates :rolleyes:

Eki

11th January 2010, 18:45

Eki,

Stop pointing fingers at others
I will, if you will stop pointing fingers at others, including Iran and Cuba.

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 20:25

I don't understand all this stuff about 'democracy' being the 'be all and end all' of everything.

You always criticise a lot of countries that don't follow your line of thought on a 'western style democracy'.

I have yet to see you make any criticism of the one party state that is Singapore, is there 'democracy' there if you are non ethnic Chinese? Go to Singapore and express you displeasure of the ruling party and in particular anything criticism of Lee kuan yew or his family in print and see what happens.

http://yoursdp.org/

Democracy in Fiji if you aren't a native Fijian? Not anymore.

The Tamils don't think there is much 'democracy' in Sri Lanka.

Malaysia, fine if you are a malay, bad luck if you are from any other ethnic background.

Indonesia? 'democracy' in West Papua in particular, don't make me laugh!

'Democracy' in Turkey if you are a Kurd?

Southern Africa, please tell me you were not in favour of apartheid in the former Rhodesia or SA. I'm not talking about conditions now with 1 person 1 vote (what a novel concept!). I'm talking about 30 plus years ago when blacks didn't have the vote. Don't go on about what Mugabe is doing now, we all know he is a clown, but if your view of 'democracy' in Iraq is to be followed then Mugabe is right.

Democracy in Kenya? have you read anything about how Kenyan politics is divided along tribal lines?

Modern Russia a 'democracy?

'Democracy' in Burma, or for that matter read anything about 'democracy' in Cambodia, was the former South Vietnam a democracy?

is there real 'democracy' in israel for Palestinians, again don't make me laugh.

I could go on and on, you have to realise that 'your' view of a 'western style democracy' isn't fit for every country in the world.

As for Iran stoning people to death, do you have a valid link please, did you know that the torah permits stoning, how is this 'good' and the koran bad ?

Just as an aside is stoning someone to death a less humane way of executing a person compared to frying them in an electric chair?

http://www.ccadp.org/botchedx.htm and http://joesbotchedexecutions.blogspot.com/

Lot's of food for thought!

I didn't say it they should all be Western Democracies but there is always some sort of accepted order that works, whether through the vote or by cultural consenses in successful countries. Countries with good human rights records, countries with a plurality of the vote tend to be stable, and have better economic growth and living standards. Countries like Singapore, China, Russia and the others are not democracies but have taken on the trappings of them in their economic sphere.

Where I disagree with people though is everyone has the right to be free of discrimination, freedom of religion (no matter how wacky) and freedom of expression. You tend to get that in the US, The UK, Canada, Western Europe and the you guys down under. Your culture and mine are not perfect. We have some issues we need to get under control with our aboriginal populations, but the point still remains I respect nations that know what they have to do and make strides towards it. I respect nations that recognize the same freedoms I am allowed. Eki tends to defend places like Iran, and Iraq for their behaviour as if that is all they deserve and that is all they can be expected to have. His defense of the political system in Iran is just silly and I am sure you can read reams of UN reports and Amnesty International's statements on the democratic non-reality in Iran. The candidates are strictly screened,and you are not given any illusions at all in who runs the country there. The Imams do, and the President doesn't do or say anything they don't approve of.

Since I refuse to believe the majority of the people of Iran want to drop nuclear weapons on Israel (and I know Eki will state where did they say that? Eki, read what the man says. Wiping Israel off the map isn't sending them teapots and flowers) or in the very least, start a war with Israel; I must believe that the pluralty of the vote in Iran isn't reflected in its government, and since the restriction of press freedom's in that nation is so obvious, you have to believe the "revolution" there is a lot more vocal and obvious than we know. Furthermore, unlike where people in the US who disagreed with Bush were able to demonstrate and speak freely, I defy anyone to show me where this can be happening on the streets of Tehran without some threat. Amnesty doesn't put Iran up there on the list of countries to emulate for a reason. It isn't just me saying their country is a religious theocracy/terror state...

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 20:29

So can you. In the US prisoners aren't even allowed to vote, let alone be a candidate. And the US has most prisoners per capita in the world! You call that freedom?

Oh, and in the recent elections in Iraq and Afghanistan the locals could only vote a list of Government approved candidates, THE US GOVERNMENT APPROVED, and some call them countries!

Not true.

Anyone could run in Iraq and the people elected have not toed the US line at all. Didn't see Bush or Obama toss in another coup over that.

US has the most prisoners per capita because they have a lot of crime. Why? Who knows? The US also has a pretty good policing system and a working justice system so they catch and convict more to. Still have open courts, with lawyers and rules to protect the innocent. God knows it isn't perfect, but wrongfully convicted people are in any nation, not just the US.

But I know this. IF you are in jail, you give up your right of freedom, and your right to vote. You get out, you get that back. Why should prisoners vote? You going to give them a trip to Jamaica in the winter if they look a little pale? How about some wine with dinner? Eki, they are in prison for crying out loud!!!

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 20:31

I will, if you will stop pointing fingers at others, including Iran and Cuba.

Mustn't point out that Iran and Cuba are hell holes for the people living there who just want a better life. Mustn't point out both nations have restrictions on free speech and have both been targets for Amnesty in the past...naaah..cant point THAT out can we?

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 20:36

I think the whole Western world is faced with the same situation.

It is. If only I could have stopped Drifter from making that statement about the Finns....lol.

Illegals are a problem, but it is a compliment of sorts. You know your nation has arrived as a destination for people wanting out of horrible situations when you have illegals showing up on your border or shores.

I don't see anyone fighting to get into some nations that are constantly defended on here.

Understand this too. Those Illegals I don't blame for wanting more, and I don't hate them for trying to get into my nation or any where else. I get why they are leaving their own nation. In the case of Mexico, grinding poverty and a somewhat suspect and corrupt political class has made Mexico not a very good place for everyone while the Gringo's to the north will hire them under the table often for various jobs other gringo's wont do for that same sum of money. IT is corruption often that allows Illegals to think they will be able to stay.

IN the case of Canada, illegals arriving here can string the system along for month's while we decide if they are legitimate refugee's or just line jumpers. Then it can take months of redtape to extradite them and this is assuming of course they don't just vanish and live and work in the underground economy....

Still, you need a pretty good country to have these problems.....

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 20:44

I will, if you will stop pointing fingers at others, including Iran and Cuba.

If you just answer the question.

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 20:51

If you just answer the question.

Tony, he answers questions with other questions...that is his charm...

Eki

11th January 2010, 21:06

Anyone could run in Iraq and the people elected have not toed the US line at all.
Saddam couldn't, neither could much of the former Baath party.

Eki

11th January 2010, 21:08

Mustn't point out that Iran and Cuba are hell holes for the people living there who just want a better life. Mustn't point out both nations have restrictions on free speech and have both been targets for Amnesty in the past...naaah..cant point THAT out can we?

The US has been a target for Amnesty International too, for Gitmo and other things.

Eki

11th January 2010, 21:14

Mustn't point out that Iran and Cuba are hell holes for the people living there who just want a better life.

Even if they were, they probably know it without you pointing it out to them and looking them down your nose.

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 22:05

The US has been a target for Amnesty International too, for Gitmo and other things.

Yes they have...and that still is a long way from the worst offenders list. I believe Iran is on it...and I know if Amnesty had to pick who was worse, the Cubans would be out in front of the Yanks too....

Mark in Oshawa

11th January 2010, 22:08

Even if they were, they probably know it without you pointing it out to them and looking them down your nose.

I am sure they know it. I don't really care if they or you don't like me criticizing them. Nations I really reserve my scorn for deserve it for the every day way they treat their citizens. If you think nothing of your people but to ignore due process and treat them worse than dogs, than you shouldn't be defended in the abstract.

See, I don't mind people criticizing the US where it is honestly deserved. Gitmo is a bad idea, but it came out of the Americans actually taking prisioners instead of shooting them all and leaving no one alive. So while you nail them for it, you also better acknowledge the prisoners are kept in good health, fed well, given A/C, access to lawyers and will be tried. Most of the nations you want to defend would have shot em all and you wouldn't have been the wiser.

Easy Drifter

11th January 2010, 23:33

Eki is losing to sane arguments so as usual he goes off on tangents and picks on isolated situations instead of the true large picture.

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 23:47

Saddam couldn't, neither could much of the former Baath party.

Answer the question!

anthonyvop

11th January 2010, 23:47

Even if they were, they probably know it without you pointing it out to them and looking them down your nose.

Answer the question.

Camelopard

11th January 2010, 23:52

Eki,

Stop pointing fingers at others(No matter how ridiculous your assertions), try to stick to the subject and please explain to us how Iran is a true democracy.

We are waiting.

Hello mr kettle, meet mr pot, actually it is a bit rich for you to be accusing someone else of not not sticking to the subject.

The subject (not necessarily the title) of this thread was France being named at the top of a list of the most livable countries with Australia second.

Actually I think that they got that wrong, Australia should be number one, after it isn't called "God's own country" for no reason you know!

Hondo

12th January 2010, 00:19

anthonyvop

12th January 2010, 00:19

Even if they were, they probably know it without you pointing it out to them and looking them down your nose.
Answer the question?

Daniel

12th January 2010, 00:22

I think Mugabe is a perfect example of how democracy can sometimes be worse than apartheid.

anthonyvop

12th January 2010, 00:25

Hello mr kettle, meet mr pot, actually it is a bit rich for you to be accusing someone else of not not sticking to the subject.

The subject (not necessarily the title) of this thread was France being named at the top of a list of the most livable countries with Australia second.

Actually I think that they got that wrong, Australia should be number one, after it isn't called "God's own country" for no reason you know!

Australia? Some nice looking slutty women but........You drive on the wrong side. You gave us Koalas(Nasty smelly things) and Paul Hogan.

I would put you in about 8th or 9th.

Getting back to the list. One other problem I see is having the USA as one country or entity. There are some places I love and some places I would never live(unless they pay me good)
Detroit, Cleveland, Philly, Indy, Cincinnati, Anywhere in New Jersey, Anywhere in New Your except the upper East side of Manhattan, Boston are among some of the places I would not want to live.

Brown, Jon Brow

12th January 2010, 00:28

Camelopard

12th January 2010, 00:39

Australia? Some nice looking slutty women but........You drive on the wrong side. You gave us Koalas(Nasty smelly things) and Paul Hogan.

I would put you in about 8th or 9th.

Getting back to the list. One other problem I see is having the USA as one country or entity. There are some places I love and some places I would never live(unless they pay me good)
Detroit, Cleveland, Philly, Indy, Cincinnati, Anywhere in New Jersey, Anywhere in New Your except the upper East side of Manhattan, Boston are among some of the places I would not want to live.

You can keep Paul Hogan and Rupert of course.

What is wrong with koalas? All they do is sit in trees and eat and sleep.

I find it interesting that you guys side with the frenchies and drive on the 'wrong' side of the road! :)

I would live in some parts of the US, the Pacific North West, the hill country in Texas, but on the whole I'm quite happy living in oz and I can't say that I have had any desires to live anywhere else permanently.

Brown, Jon Brow

12th January 2010, 00:45

One thing that would really put myself off living in Aus would be the dangerous and poisonous wildlife you have.

The most dangerous creature I'll ever come across in the UK is a Glaswegian.

Camelopard

12th January 2010, 00:52

The most dangerous creature I'll ever come across in the UK is a Glaswegian.

Now that is just stereotyping, whoops wrong thread! :)

Camelopard

12th January 2010, 01:21

You cannot exclude Mugabe from what is going on now. Clown he may be, but he is a clown born of a system insisted upon by most of the rest of the world in the name of freedom and equality. Not only should you go on about Mugabe, he should be the poster boy.

Hello Fiero, I think you are misinterpreting what I'm trying to say. Of course I don't think Mugabe is good or anyone else like him, Zim is still one country I want to visit but won't whilst he is still in power, same with Burma and a few others.

Anyway I was trying to make the point that people who criticise Iran and others for their lack of western style 'democracy' now, would probably have been against apartheid 30 plus years ago.

Do I think Iran is a democracy? No, was it a democracy under the Shah either? No. Iran under the Shah did not upset our western sensibilities as he was pro western and Iran was very important to the west due to the border it shared with the former Soviet Union.
Even though, things must have been bad for some otherwise the revolution would not have occurred. Revolutions just don't 'happen' and it isn't just down to outside interference either.
Would having one person one vote change things in Iran now, I don't think so, not in the short term.

What is the answer, imo it is education, educate people and then they will work things out for themselves eventually.

Again as an aside has anyone on this forum visited Iran or are we all just armchair travelers and critics?

There is a great site I visit regularly called http://www.travelblog.org go to the section on Iran, read peoples experiences in the real world. The blogs I have read, written by people who are there now or recently are overwhelmingly positive about the country.

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 02:31

I think Mugabe is a perfect example of how democracy can sometimes be worse than apartheid.

When Zimbabwe has a true democracy, let me know. Last election there was evidence of fraud and voter intimidation. The previous rulers, like the White Led Apartheid regime in South Africa were odious to me as well. They at least understood something of the economics of their nation, compared to Mugabe. Mugabe is a HUGE waste of time, money and a thug. Many whites in Rhodesia were not big fans of a two class citzenry but knew the change to a multipluraistic society had to be gradual. Mugabe just got even for years of White Rule and has destroyed the country. A true gentleman in Nelson Mandela did NOT do that in South Africa, and although they have issues with crime and unemployment, I think if the leadership there is wise, they will make it back to a true first world status. The democratic institutions there are still more or less hanging in there. It is the enforcing of the law they are weak on...

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 02:34

You can keep Paul Hogan and Rupert of course.

What is wrong with koalas? All they do is sit in trees and eat and sleep.

I find it interesting that you guys side with the frenchies and drive on the 'wrong' side of the road! :)

I would live in some parts of the US, the Pacific North West, the hill country in Texas, but on the whole I'm quite happy living in oz and I can't say that I have had any desires to live anywhere else permanently.

I don't know Camel, I think by marrying a Canadian you are in denial of your attraction for our part of the world. If our weather didn't have the winters it has (and Vancouver doesn't really have those!) we would have scored higher.

AS for the US, There are parts I would love to live in on a lot of levels. Vegas, the Carolinas, Virginia and New Hampshire are all favourite states of mine, and I feel very at home in Wisconsin.

Hondo

12th January 2010, 03:25

Hello Fiero, I think you are misinterpreting what I'm trying to say. Of course I don't think Mugabe is good or anyone else like him, Zim is still one country I want to visit but won't whilst he is still in power, same with Burma and a few others.

Anyway I was trying to make the point that people who criticise Iran and others for their lack of western style 'democracy' now, would probably have been against apartheid 30 plus years ago.

Do I think Iran is a democracy? No, was it a democracy under the Shah either? No. Iran under the Shah did not upset our western sensibilities as he was pro western and Iran was very important to the west due to the border it shared with the former Soviet Union.
Even though, things must have been bad for some otherwise the revolution would not have occurred. Revolutions just don't 'happen' and it isn't just down to outside interference either.
Would having one person one vote change things in Iran now, I don't think so, not in the short term.

What is the answer, imo it is education, educate people and then they will work things out for themselves eventually.

Again as an aside has anyone on this forum visited Iran or are we all just armchair travelers and critics?

There is a great site I visit regularly called http://www.travelblog.org go to the section on Iran, read peoples experiences in the real world. The blogs I have read, written by people who are there now or recently are overwhelmingly positive about the country.

The United States is so geologically diverse, that I have little desire to travel outside it with 3 exceptions. I would like to tour Italy and Australia, and New Zealand on my Harley. I have spent time in other countries and was always happy to get home.

I think most of us would agree that we have little or no input in the foreign policies of our governments. To be honest, I think the only time we have any input at all is when what we want coincides with what they wanted anyway

You are correct about education. Unfortunately, education is the enemy of religion. In no holy book or creed will you find the words "Go forth and build schools and universities to teach and employ the fruits of individual thinking." In addition, one independent thinker will always believe his way is better than the system the other independent thinker came up with and be willing to bash his head in to prove it. Thats the way it is. You will always have the hypocrisy in government policy and in your personal moral code.

I cringe at some of the reasonings we use as justifications. If we defend a standard for one, we should defend it for all, or quit using it in the rationalization. NATO goes into Bosnia over human rights issues, divies everything up, gets everyone to make nice nice, and even puts on a war crimes show trial. Bullsh!t. I don't see NATO stomping into China about rights issues. Why not? Aren't human rights the same for all humans everywhere? Maybe we need to redefine it as human rights when convient. We do business with China, we make money with China, China can put an @aa whupping on us we won't forget. I'm not saying they would win, because they wouldn't, but we'd all know we'd been in a fight. Bosnia was a bunch of white europeans creating a ruckus that was interferring with business. That had to be stopped and it was. Meanwhile, you've got a couple of tribes in Africa cheerfully genociding each other to death and nobody cares. Why not? Because nobody is losing money on them, nobody has anything to gain from them, and they are black africans.

Were it up to me, I'd let each nation choose their own government or none at all if they like that better. If the people are unhappy with that government, it is up to them to change it. If they have the numbers and the will, it will be easier than just having the will and getting lucky with a coup like Saddam did when he took power. In addition, as long as my interests were respected, I'd leave each nation to prosper or hang itself. As to Iran, they can develop all the nuclear anything they want. But, if any of it gets used on me they will be breaking Japan's record.

All things considered, there's alot to be said for the doctrine of Mutually Assurred Destruction. To a large degree, it worked.

anthonyvop

12th January 2010, 03:31

What has the side of the road you drive on got to do with quality of life?

It is called a sense of humor. Very important when considering quality of life.

Camelopard

12th January 2010, 03:33

The United States is so geologically diverse, that I have little desire to travel outside it with 3 exceptions. I would like to tour Italy and Australia, and New Zealand on my Harley. I have spent time in other countries and was always happy to get home.

I think most of us would agree that we have little or no input in the foreign policies of our governments. To be honest, I think the only time we have any input at all is when what we want coincides with what they wanted anyway

You are correct about education. Unfortunately, education is the enemy of religion. In no holy book or creed will you find the words "Go forth and build schools and universities to teach and employ the fruits of individual thinking." In addition, one independent thinker will always believe his way is better than the system the other independent thinker came up with and be willing to bash his head in to prove it. Thats the way it is. You will always have the hypocrisy in government policy and in your personal moral code.

I cringe at some of the reasonings we use as justifications. If we defend a standard for one, we should defend it for all, or quit using it in the rationalization. NATO goes into Bosnia over human rights issues, divies everything up, gets everyone to make nice nice, and even puts on a war crimes show trial. Bullsh!t. I don't see NATO stomping into China about rights issues. Why not? Aren't human rights the same for all humans everywhere? Maybe we need to redefine it as human rights when convient. We do business with China, we make money with China, China can put an @aa whupping on us we won't forget. I'm not saying they would win, because they wouldn't, but we'd all know we'd been in a fight. Bosnia was a bunch of white europeans creating a ruckus that was interferring with business. That had to be stopped and it was. Meanwhile, you've got a couple of tribes in Africa cheerfully genociding each other to death and nobody cares. Why not? Because nobody is losing money on them, nobody has anything to gain from them, and they are black africans.

Were it up to me, I'd let each nation choose their own government or none at all if they like that better. If the people are unhappy with that government, it is up to them to change it. If they have the numbers and the will, it will be easier than just having the will and getting lucky with a coup like Saddam did when he took power. In addition, as long as my interests were respected, I'd leave each nation to prosper or hang itself. As to Iran, they can develop all the nuclear anything they want. But, if any of it gets used on me they will be breaking Japan's record.

All things considered, there's alot to be said for the doctrine of Mutually Assurred Destruction. To a large degree, it worked.

Thanks Fiero, I wish I could put into words what I think as well as you have in the above.

Eki

12th January 2010, 06:49

Answer the question!
I did, and I'm sticking to it.

Brown, Jon Brow

12th January 2010, 12:07

It is called a sense of humor. Very important when considering quality of life.

In that case Britain should have come higher seen as we make the best comedy TV shows :p

anthonyvop

12th January 2010, 18:32

I did, and I'm sticking to it.

No you didn't.

Explain to us how Iran is a true democracy.

Answer the question.

anthonyvop

12th January 2010, 18:32

In that case Britain should have come higher seen as we make the best comedy TV shows :p

Frisky DIngo is not British.

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 18:54

The United States is so geologically diverse, that I have little desire to travel outside it with 3 exceptions. I would like to tour Italy and Australia, and New Zealand on my Harley. I have spent time in other countries and was always happy to get home.

I think most of us would agree that we have little or no input in the foreign policies of our governments. To be honest, I think the only time we have any input at all is when what we want coincides with what they wanted anyway

You are correct about education. Unfortunately, education is the enemy of religion. In no holy book or creed will you find the words "Go forth and build schools and universities to teach and employ the fruits of individual thinking." In addition, one independent thinker will always believe his way is better than the system the other independent thinker came up with and be willing to bash his head in to prove it. Thats the way it is. You will always have the hypocrisy in government policy and in your personal moral code.

I cringe at some of the reasonings we use as justifications. If we defend a standard for one, we should defend it for all, or quit using it in the rationalization. NATO goes into Bosnia over human rights issues, divies everything up, gets everyone to make nice nice, and even puts on a war crimes show trial. Bullsh!t. I don't see NATO stomping into China about rights issues. Why not? Aren't human rights the same for all humans everywhere? Maybe we need to redefine it as human rights when convient. We do business with China, we make money with China, China can put an @aa whupping on us we won't forget. I'm not saying they would win, because they wouldn't, but we'd all know we'd been in a fight. Bosnia was a bunch of white europeans creating a ruckus that was interferring with business. That had to be stopped and it was. Meanwhile, you've got a couple of tribes in Africa cheerfully genociding each other to death and nobody cares. Why not? Because nobody is losing money on them, nobody has anything to gain from them, and they are black africans.

Were it up to me, I'd let each nation choose their own government or none at all if they like that better. If the people are unhappy with that government, it is up to them to change it. If they have the numbers and the will, it will be easier than just having the will and getting lucky with a coup like Saddam did when he took power. In addition, as long as my interests were respected, I'd leave each nation to prosper or hang itself. As to Iran, they can develop all the nuclear anything they want. But, if any of it gets used on me they will be breaking Japan's record.

All things considered, there's alot to be said for the doctrine of Mutually Assurred Destruction. To a large degree, it worked.

I wont disagree with a lot of it. You are right how we pick and choose the fights...but that is because the western world would be in an endless war to end all wars if it went to defend human rights everywhere. It offends me the way China treats its citizens and a few others, but I realize there isn't much we can do about it without sacrificing everything. The only thing is tho Fiero, is isolation policies is more or less what the US has tried in the past only to be dragged into wars, either Pearl Harbor or 9-11 really were as a result of the US trying to stay out of power while trying to wield soft power....

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 18:56

In that case Britain should have come higher seen as we make the best comedy TV shows :p

That was when Monty Python and Blackadder were on the air. I am thinking us Canucks should have risen higher, we had SCTV and provided a lot of alumnai to SNL.

anthonyvop

12th January 2010, 20:38

That was when Monty Python and Blackadder were on the air. I am thinking us Canucks should have risen higher, we had SCTV and provided a lot of alumnai to SNL.

Big time SCTV fan. A great Canadian export.

But Remember Second City originally started in Chicago.

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 20:43

Big time SCTV fan. A great Canadian export.

But Remember Second City originally started in Chicago.

Second City did, but Dan Ackroyd, John Candy, Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara, Rick Moranis, Martin Short, and Mike Myers are all Second City Toronto alums.....
The show on TV was a Canadian produced show....

Eki

12th January 2010, 20:44

No you didn't.

Explain to us how Iran is a true democracy.

Answer the question.
I did, even if you don't agree with it.

You didn't answer the question why you think up to 5 billion people would like to move to the US. Answer the question.

BTW, US sponsored terrorists just killed an Iranian nuclear physicist, not very democratic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8453401.stm

motetarip

12th January 2010, 21:17

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 21:41

I did, even if you don't agree with it.

You didn't answer the question why you think up to 5 billion people would like to move to the US. Answer the question.

BTW, US sponsored terrorists just killed an Iranian nuclear physicist, not very democratic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8453401.stm

That is Iran's claim. It isn't proven, and with Obama in power, HIGHLY unlikely. Nice spin Eki....

Eki

12th January 2010, 22:03

That is Iran's claim. It isn't proven, and with Obama in power, HIGHLY unlikely. Nice spin Eki....

So, maybe it's Israel. Obama doesn't control Israel.

motetarip

12th January 2010, 22:25

So, maybe it's Israel. Obama doesn't control Israel.

I dunno, I think the US probably expect something in return for their 'Foreign Assistance' payments or are we all pretending to live in a fluffy world of honest and decent western politicians?

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 22:35

Did someone write that the US has freedom of speech? Seriously!? Sure if your the right colour and religion with a big fat wallet I'm sure you can say what you want. Very much like the UK, except we also have an over-zealous and over-authorised police force and a kangaroo court justice system. Try falling foul of the law by accident and learn how free you really are.

France is a great country, as is Canada, I'd live in either. And I've been to both.

That's nonsense. Sorry, but in the US you can write a paper and be published disagreeing with the gov't. If you are black, or yellow or white, it matters little. Last time I looked, a black man was elected to the Oval Office. Lets drop the fiction there is no free speech in America. IN Britain? Well, you guys cancelled a parade through the streets of a town by people that were repugnent. I suppose it could be argued you were forstalling a riot, but I suspect this is just another example of the Gordon Brown gov't muzzling free speech, the same way they did when that Dutch MP bone head wanted to come over and make a speech, and the bone head talkshow host from America wanted to visit (he had been there before..so this is really lame).

Free speech either matters or it don't. The UK should be more free than it is, but don't ever accuse the Yanks of restricting it. There is too much of it all on all sides there....

Mark in Oshawa

12th January 2010, 22:37

So, maybe it's Israel. Obama doesn't control Israel.

You accused the Americans of it. Iran Said it, that does'nt make it true. For all we know Iranians against their government did it. Since the free press is a foreign concept to the Imams and their little anti Jewish puppet, I take such accusations from Tehran as just noise.....It may have been Israel, or it may have not been. No one can know the truth in a country where the truth is the first victim of the regime...

motetarip

12th January 2010, 22:53

That's nonsense. Sorry, but in the US you can write a paper and be published disagreeing with the gov't. If you are black, or yellow or white, it matters little. Last time I looked, a black man was elected to the Oval Office. Lets drop the fiction there is no free speech in America. IN Britain? Well, you guys cancelled a parade through the streets of a town by people that were repugnent. I suppose it could be argued you were forstalling a riot, but I suspect this is just another example of the Gordon Brown gov't muzzling free speech, the same way they did when that Dutch MP bone head wanted to come over and make a speech, and the bone head talkshow host from America wanted to visit (he had been there before..so this is really lame).

Free speech either matters or it don't. The UK should be more free than it is, but don't ever accuse the Yanks of restricting it. There is too much of it all on all sides there....

Er firstly the government didn't cancel the Islam4UK march, they cancelled it themselves. Probably not a bad idea, although according to you they could probably march past Ground Zero and remain unharmed.

Secondly you can criticise the UK all you want, but don't ever stop me from criticising the US, because that's the principle of freedom you believe in.

Thirdly don't believe that because something is written into your constitution that it actually occurs in practice, we're all very small and disposable cogs in very large machines. Just ask Rodney King.

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 00:22

Second City did, but Dan Ackroyd, John Candy, Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara, Rick Moranis, Martin Short, and Mike Myers are all Second City Toronto alums.....
The show on TV was a Canadian produced show....
Yep.....The best thing that ever came out of Canada since...........????
Ever?

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 00:24

I did, even if you don't agree with it.

You claimed that Iran was a Democracy.
Answer the question. how is Iran a true Democracy?
They can't vote for whomever they want.
Not everybody can run for office unless approved by the Government.

So answer the question.......How is Iran a true Democracy?

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 00:25

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 00:26

So, maybe it's Israel. Obama doesn't control Israel.

Answer the question.

Mark in Oshawa

13th January 2010, 00:46

Yep.....The best thing that ever came out of Canada since...........????
Ever?

Lets see....Phil Hartman, Mike Myers, Howie Mandel, Alex Trebek, Monty Hall, Art Linkletter (if you want go back to ancient stuff), Shania Twain, Celine ( you can keep her) Dion, Micheal Buble, Racheal McAdams, Ryan Gosling, Kiefer Sutherland, Matthew Perry, Michael J Fox...oh hell we have supplied with you an endless supply of starlets, hotties, comedians and actors. I could go on....but is there a point?We are infiltrating you guys slowly but surely Tony...

Mark in Oshawa

13th January 2010, 00:47

Lets see....Phil Hartman, Mike Myers, Howie Mandel, Alex Trebek, Monty Hall, Art Linkletter (if you want go back to ancient stuff), Shania Twain, Celine ( you can keep her) Dion, Micheal Buble, Racheal McAdams, Ryan Gosling, Kiefer Sutherland, Matthew Perry, Michael J Fox...oh hell we have supplied with you an endless supply of starlets, hotties, comedians and actors. I could go on....but is there a point?We are infiltrating you guys slowly but surely Tony...

Oh ya and the guy who produced/directed the two biggest grossing pictures in Hollywood history, James Cameron.

Part of your History is ours buddy....at least when it comes to entertainment...

motetarip

13th January 2010, 00:55

Give me one example of a person in the US's right to free speech was infringed!

Historically I could point the finger at lots, McCarthyism or early civil rights activists, but that would be unfair. Looking recently, the first thing I came to on Google:

http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/we-told-them-it-would-come

I don't intend to keep answering questions if you want to fire them at me so I apologise if I get bored soon.

edv

13th January 2010, 01:23

Yep.....The best thing that ever came out of Canada since...........????
Ever?
Since all those snowbirds that bestowed upon you an economy.

chuck34

13th January 2010, 01:42

Historically I could point the finger at lots, McCarthyism or early civil rights activists, but that would be unfair. Looking recently, the first thing I came to on Google:

http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/we-told-them-it-would-come

I don't intend to keep answering questions if you want to fire them at me so I apologise if I get bored soon.

That's pretty weak. In what other country on Earth could the KKK, White Supremisists, the Nation of Islam, and the Black Panthers all have a parade, and probably on the same day in the same city?

Sure you can probably dig up small, petty little examples like your case of Col. Morris Davis, but do you really think that amounts to a systemic breach of citizens' right of free speach? More so than what happens/is happening in Iran? More so than the crazy examples Mark brough up about the UK? Come on.

We ain't perfect, FAR from it, but I'd say we're on the right track, and probably farther ahead than most.

Oh yeah, what exactly happened to McCarthy? What about Civil Rights laws? Come on man, think for a minute before you post this stuff.

Rollo

13th January 2010, 01:47

Give me one example of a person in the US's right to free speech was infringed!

How about within section 215 of the Patriot Act 2001?
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Section213.html#215
No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section.
ie. provided the FBI wishes something suppressed, then US Federal Law allows it.

There were huge uproars in the press at the time over this. Free Speech and Advocacy groups had a field day.

chuck34

13th January 2010, 01:56

So, maybe it's Israel. Obama doesn't control Israel.

Or maybe it was Ahmadinejad I heard at least one report that this prof. was at least a bit anti-government.

Sounds like a win-win for Mahmoud's power. Off a disident prof., blame the US and/or Israel, consolidate power by promising to protect everyone else from the "two Satans". Sounds pretty plausible to me. But then again I'm not Eki, so what do I know?

motetarip

13th January 2010, 02:04

That's pretty weak. In what other country on Earth could the KKK, White Supremisists, the Nation of Islam, and the Black Panthers all have a parade, and probably on the same day in the same city?

Sure you can probably dig up small, petty little examples like your case of Col. Morris Davis, but do you really think that amounts to a systemic breach of citizens' right of free speach? More so than what happens/is happening in Iran? More so than the crazy examples Mark brough up about the UK? Come on.

We ain't perfect, FAR from it, but I'd say we're on the right track, and probably farther ahead than most.

Oh yeah, what exactly happened to McCarthy? What about Civil Rights laws? Come on man, think for a minute before you post this stuff.

Yeah you keep believing you live in the land of the free. Unfortunately Col.Morris is an example of systemic breach because you'll more than likely find similar cases repeated thousands of times across the nation.

Think about what for a minute? I said it was unfair because its so far in the past. And when did the KKK, White Supremisists, the Nation of Islam, and the Black Panthers all had a parade on the same day in the same place? Dream on

chuck34

13th January 2010, 02:06

How about within section 215 of the Patriot Act 2001?
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Section213.html#215
No person shall disclose to any other person (other than those persons necessary to produce the tangible things under this section) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained tangible things under this section.
ie. provided the FBI wishes something suppressed, then US Federal Law allows it.

There were huge uproars in the press at the time over this. Free Speech and Advocacy groups had a field day.

And how many prosecutions were brought under this specific section of the Law?

Do you actually know what Section 215 says?
http://www.justice.gov/dag/readingroom/dag-memo-07062004.pdf
"These are the same types of materials that prosecutors have long been able to obtain with grand jury subpoenas in criminal investigations. However, section 215 applies in a much narrower set of circumstances than do grand jury subpoenas. Section 215 can only be used "to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution." 50 U.S.C. § 1861(a)(1)."

So right there, in the Law itself, it says that this can not impinge upon someone's right to free speach (the first amendment to the Constitution). And it goes further than that, but I'll leave it up to you to do the research.

chuck34

13th January 2010, 02:13

Yeah you keep believing you live in the land of the free. Unfortunately Col.Morris is an example of systemic breach because you'll more than likely find similar cases repeated thousands of times across the nation.

Think about what for a minute? I said it was unfair because its so far in the past. And when did the KKK, White Supremisists, the Nation of Islam, and the Black Panthers all had a parade on the same day in the same place? Dream on

So dig up a bunch more Col. Morris examples (let's say 1% of the population) then I might think you have a point.

As for all 4 having parades on the same day, I don't think it's happened. But does that mean it won't? I do know that many times if one has a march another will stage a counter march at the same time. You will have to prove to me that it CAN NOT happen for me to take your side. Our Constitution says that it can, so I'll side with the law on this one.

And what does "I said it was unfair because its so far in the past." mean? Are you saying that we have no chance to EVER make up for our PAST mistakes?

Mark in Oshawa

13th January 2010, 05:02

Mark in Oshawa

13th January 2010, 05:05

Yeah you keep believing you live in the land of the free. Unfortunately Col.Morris is an example of systemic breach because you'll more than likely find similar cases repeated thousands of times across the nation.

Think about what for a minute? I said it was unfair because its so far in the past. And when did the KKK, White Supremisists, the Nation of Islam, and the Black Panthers all had a parade on the same day in the same place? Dream on

They could. I remember as a kid in the early 80's watching 60 minutes to a story on the town of Skokie Illinois where the Nazi party of America marched, and a black activist group and Jewish rights group marched opposite with the cops in the middle.

Anyone who doesn't grasp that the US has free speech obviously is not trying to find it. I can find fault with some things the USA has done, but free speech rights are FAR more protected there, than in most Western nations.

Eki

13th January 2010, 06:55

No one can know the truth in a country where the truth is the first victim of the regime...
Yes, it's just like the Bush regime again, this time in Iran.

Eki

13th January 2010, 07:10

No...the Yanks can be accused of a lot of things, but muzzling free speech isn't one of them.
What about walking out from the UN when Ahmadinejad was giving a speech?

Easy Drifter

13th January 2010, 07:14

Prove it Eki! Just give us bit of real proof that the US had anything to do with it. Not the bathering of someone who wants to deflect suspicion from himself.
Further, in case you have your head so far up -------- Bush is not President!
Remember a proof is not a proof until it is proven. (Jean Chretien)

Eki

13th January 2010, 07:17

Prove it Eki! Just give us bit of real proof that the US had anything to do with it. Not the bathering of someone who wants to deflect suspicion from himself.

Like Bush proved Iraq was behind 9/11 and had WMDs before accusing them and invading them.

Easy Drifter

13th January 2010, 10:40

Prove it Eki.
This has nothing to do with a former President and what he did or didn't do.
Prove the US had anything to do with the killing.
Just prove it or stop making your assumptions into fact.

Eki

13th January 2010, 12:25

Prove it Eki.
This has nothing to do with a former President and what he did or didn't do.
Prove the US had anything to do with the killing.
Just prove it or stop making your assumptions into fact.
Many here believe without proving that the US is always right and Iran always wrong. I do the opposite to keep the balance.

Eki

13th January 2010, 12:47

BTW, where's fousto? I haven't seen him for awhile.

chuck34

13th January 2010, 13:40

What about walking out from the UN when Ahmadinejad was giving a speech?

Uh, Eki, you do realize that Ahmadinejad was free to give his speech right? No one cut him off, you do realize that don't you? You also know that free speech also means having the right not to listen, or in this case walk out, right?

You just keep going farther and farther off the deep end.

chuck34

13th January 2010, 13:43

Like Bush proved Iraq was behind 9/11 and had WMDs before accusing them and invading them.

NO ONE has ever said that Iraq was behind 9/11 except left wing talking heads when they are trying to blame Bush for something.

Nice work though, hijacking yet another thread to your favorite subject. How long are you going to be blaming the world's troubles on Bush?

chuck34

13th January 2010, 13:45

Many here believe without proving that the US is always right and Iran always wrong. I do the opposite to keep the balance.

Who says the the US is always right? I think everyone here has said that something that the US has done or is doing is wrong. On the other hand, I don't believe that just siding with Iran/Iraq/any other 2 bit dictatorship, for the sake of it really does anything to help your cause.

Easy Drifter

13th January 2010, 14:13

So Eki you are making a positive statement blaming the US whithout a scrap of evidence.
Making things up.
Stating as a fact something that you know absolutely nothing about.
Why should we ever believe anything you say?
Maybe I should state as a fact that you are George W Bush's half brother.
You hate him because he won't admit you are his half brother.
That has got to be it.
Why that is as clear as Eki's reasoning.
Eki is George Bush's half brother! :eek: :D

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 14:37

Yeah you keep believing you live in the land of the free. Unfortunately Col.Morris is an example of systemic breach because you'll more than likely find similar cases repeated thousands of times across the nation.

I keep on re-reading the article about that case and I fail to see how it has to do with the suppression of the freedom of speech.

Nobody stopped Col. Morris from writing or publishing his articles. He wasn't arrested, charged, imprisoned, tortured or harassed.

Being fired from one's job for insubordination is in no, way, shape or form a suppression of the right to free speech.

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 14:42

What about walking out from the UN when Ahmadinejad was giving a speech?

OH MY GOD!!!!!
Are you really that blinded by jealous rage at the US?

In what fantasy land is walking out of a speech the suppression of the right to free speech?

Did anybody stop him from talking?
Did anybody stop you from listening to his babble?

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 14:43

Yes, it's just like the Bush regime again, this time in Iran.

I am still waiting for you to explain to us how Iran is a True Democracy.

anthonyvop

13th January 2010, 14:44

Many here believe without proving that the US is always right and Iran always wrong. I do the opposite to keep the balance.

And is it Bush's fault that you can't answer a simple question?

Mark in Oshawa

15th January 2010, 07:00

OH MY GOD!!!!!
Are you really that blinded by jealous rage at the US?

In what fantasy land is walking out of a speech the suppression of the right to free speech?

Did anybody stop him from talking?
Did anybody stop you from listening to his babble?

He was still listening to it when most sensible people were reading the paper or having a nap, if they hadn't walked out.

Our PM walked out...I suppose that makes him EVIL and pro-American...oh well...

Mark in Oshawa

15th January 2010, 07:02

Yes, it's just like the Bush regime again, this time in Iran.

First off, the Presidency of the US is not a regime. He isn't god and the second he thinks he is god, he will be impeached. That goes for the current office holder as well. .

Secondly, if you have one shred of proof of censorship of the free press, or the opponents of George W Bush being muzzled by a government agency, I suggest you prove it. You finally walked out on the limb that wont support your weight for 5 seconds.

That's ok, I will follow your argument when you agree to admit your Dubya's illicit half brother....because THAT makes as much sense.

Eki

15th January 2010, 07:23

He isn't god and the second he thinks he is god, he will be impeached.
He kind of admitted he takes advice from God. Leaders who believe that God is on their side in a war are always dangerous, whatever the god and the religion.

Mark in Oshawa

15th January 2010, 07:36

He kind of admitted he takes advice from God. Leaders who believe that God is on their side in a war are always dangerous, whatever the god and the religion.

Guess you haven't heard Obama talking of his prayers eh? Don't be such a prat. You need to see a shrink. The man has been out of office a year and you vilify him as if he was still out there making your worst dreams nightmares. It is irrational....

Hondo

15th January 2010, 08:54

Give me one example of a person in the US's right to free speech was infringed!

Never is a long time and we all have histories. Sometimes those histories aren't quite as clean as we would like. Governments, every last stinking one of them, plays fast and loose with the rules when it suits their purpose. The only way many of the statements made in this thread are completely true is to nail down a specific time period. For some, their opinion is shaped by personal experience or an accurate description of an experience by a trusted friend. Much like the parable of the 6 blind men describing an elephant, every person person is convinced that the entire elephant is exactly like the part they felt.

If you'd like, I can research it, but during WWI numerous newspaper editors were imprisoned on charges of sedition for publishing editorials against our involvement in a European war.

We all have our bright spots and our not so bright spots. I doubt France would have ranked #1 in happiness during the French Revolution or the Nazi occupation. Let them enjoy their time in the sun.

Hondo

15th January 2010, 08:55

So, maybe it's Israel. Obama doesn't control Israel.

Obama controls nothing.

Hondo

15th January 2010, 09:18

He kind of admitted he takes advice from God. Leaders who believe that God is on their side in a war are always dangerous, whatever the god and the religion.

Makes me glad that Hitler didn't buddy up to God. He could have been really dangerous and..uh...hold on a minute...( Oh he did? Really? And didn't do it in the name of God? No kidding! Wow, that big of a mess huh? Damn, I guess I'm gonna look foolish. How many years? Why wasn't I told? Ok, thanks,)... uh, what I was saying, well, never mind.

chuck34

15th January 2010, 13:43

He kind of admitted he takes advice from God. Leaders who believe that God is on their side in a war are always dangerous, whatever the god and the religion.

Wow. I don't know what else to say. So every leader, pretty much ever, MUST be evil then? Wow.

F1boat

15th January 2010, 14:07

F1boat

15th January 2010, 14:11

He kind of admitted he takes advice from God. Leaders who believe that God is on their side in a war are always dangerous, whatever the god and the religion.

I agree. God and religion have no place in politics. In that respect, Bush is not dissimilar to Ahma-whatever. Of course he is the lesser evil, but not dissimilar. And frankly, exactly because of the religious extremists I would not like to visit certain parts of the USA and because of them I do think that its ranking is reasonable (and the far right economic politics). But of course, I have high respect for the country as I love many things from it, books, movies, Coke and other popculture trash :) I'd also love to see New York, L.A., Miami and other interesting places there :)

Eki

15th January 2010, 14:15

Wow. I don't know what else to say. So every leader, pretty much ever, MUST be evil then? Wow.
Only those who start wars believing they are gods themselves or believe God will approve it and protect them .

anthonyvop

15th January 2010, 14:35

Only those who start wars believing they are gods themselves or believe God will approve it and protect them .
Like the democratically elected leaders of Iran?

Oh wait.......

Your haven't been able to explain how Iran is a Democracy.

Brown, Jon Brow

15th January 2010, 14:42

Eki- I think you are losing this discussion a little bit :p

Easy Drifter

15th January 2010, 15:31

Nor can he provide any shred of evidence that the US had anything to do with the murder in Iran like he stated.

Hondo

15th January 2010, 15:32

Eki- I think you are losing this discussion a little bit :p

Nay nay young man. You cannot lose playing a philosophical game. Of course, you can't win either. Philosophy is the great intellectual game. It's a great beer and pretzels game in the pub, learned by most at a young age. Remember as a lad at a sleep over or backyard camp out when you and your mates played your "what if" debates until you finally drifted off to sleep? You didn't know it at the time, but you were engaged in the noble pastime of philosophy. Somebody puts forth an idea or concept and everybody else jumps in with conditions to refute or support the concept. The beauty of it is that nobody can win because nobody can prove any of it absolutely. Almost all philosophical subjects deal with humans and human nature so there will never be an absolutely correct solution because the individual will always remain an unknown factor. Unfortunately, it doesn't work in the real world and some people never get anything done because they can no longer make a decision and stick with it without second guessing themselves constantly.

Eki enjoys the philosophical game. He enjoys playing "devils advocate" and sometimes argues the other side on the basis of "there's two sides to every story" whether he agrees with it or not. Eki hates George Bush Jr with a passion. Ioan hates Ron Dennis with a passion. So what?

I leave you with this philosophy, make your own little corner of the world a comfortable place for you and yours because nothing else really matters.

chuck34

15th January 2010, 15:32

Only those who start wars believing they are gods themselves or believe God will approve it and protect them .

So you honestly think that Bush thought himself a god? Oh wait, you probably do.

Or how about FDR and Churchill invoking the name of God to help guide and protect their soldiers defeat pure evil? Does that make them evil now too?

Eki

15th January 2010, 15:43

Like the democratically elected leaders of Iran?

Oh wait...Iran hasn't started any wars, at least after the revolution in 1979.

Eki

15th January 2010, 15:43

So you honestly think that Bush thought himself a god? Oh wait, you probably do.

No, but he probably thought God was on his side.

Eki

15th January 2010, 15:46

Or how about FDR and Churchill invoking the name of God to help guide and protect their soldiers defeat pure evil? Does that make them evil now too?
Did FDR and Churchill start WWII?

Bush without a doubt started the war against Iraq and arguably against Afghanistan (the Afghan regime didn't attack the US, al Qaeda did).

Mark in Oshawa

15th January 2010, 15:48

I have been in many countries and have friends in many countries. I have no doubt that France is the best :) It is liberal, democratic country which tries very hard to make people feel happy. Also it has big history, great culture and delightful dishes :)
If I have to leave my country, Bulgaria, I would like to live in France. Vive le France!

France is a wonderful country in a lot of ways, but they have their foilbles, and they can be dismissive of anyone who isn't French. They are not the beacon of light towards minorities either....

Also rather socialist in how they conduct their business affairs...but it works for them..so viva la France!!! Keep it there....and not over here.

anthonyvop

15th January 2010, 15:53

Oh wait...Iran hasn't started any wars, at least after the revolution in 1979.

Tell that to the Kurds.

anthonyvop

15th January 2010, 15:54

No, but he probably thought God was on his side.

Why don't you ask God to help you answer the question?

chuck34

15th January 2010, 16:03

No, but he probably thought God was on his side.

How is that wrong?

chuck34

15th January 2010, 16:07

Did FDR and Churchill start WWII?

No but you condemned leaders for.

..believe God will approve it and protect them .
Which CLEARLY FDR and Churchill did.

Bush without a doubt started the war against Iraq and arguably against Afghanistan (the Afghan regime didn't attack the US, al Qaeda did).

Bush did not start the war against Iraq. Sadaam did by not just cooperating with the cease fire agreement he signed back in 1990. And the Afghan regime did attack the US, they knew what Al-Qaeda was up to and by doing nothing to stop it they gave tacit approval.

And we're back to Bush is Evil, blah, blah, blah. It gets old Eki.

Mark in Oshawa

15th January 2010, 16:50

Bush did not start the war against Iraq. Sadaam did by not just cooperating with the cease fire agreement he signed back in 1990. And the Afghan regime did attack the US, they knew what Al-Qaeda was up to and by doing nothing to stop it they gave tacit approval.

And we're back to Bush is Evil, blah, blah, blah. It gets old Eki.

Gray area Chuck. Bush could have done what every other limp wristed wimp politician does and not mean what he says. He could have just done a Bill Clinton and gone back to dealing with some other issue without any shooting at all. Saddam would still be there, maybe have killed a few more tens of thousands of his own citizens in torture chambers, sold some more oil to crooked UN officials like Kofi' Annan's kid, and the French and Russians would still be making money off it all. Instead, George W. Bush decided he was going enforce the sanctions and resolutions that were agreed to after the first Gulf war. Silly Bush....holding people to account..he started that war...just ask Eki.

I guess Eki was fine with the torture regime killing 10000 Iraqi's a year for Saddam's internal power but not ok with the US inadvertantly killing a few innocents in the crossfire while fighting insurgents and the remants of Saddam's army.

chuck34

15th January 2010, 16:59

Gray area Chuck. Bush could have done what every other limp wristed wimp politician does and not mean what he says. He could have just done a Bill Clinton and gone back to dealing with some other issue without any shooting at all. Saddam would still be there, maybe have killed a few more tens of thousands of his own citizens in torture chambers, sold some more oil to crooked UN officials like Kofi' Annan's kid, and the French and Russians would still be making money off it all. Instead, George W. Bush decided he was going enforce the sanctions and resolutions that were agreed to after the first Gulf war. Silly Bush....holding people to account..he started that war...just ask Eki.

I guess Eki was fine with the torture regime killing 10000 Iraqi's a year for Saddam's internal power but not ok with the US inadvertantly killing a few innocents in the crossfire while fighting insurgents and the remants of Saddam's army.

Or maybe Bush actually believed what the inteligence agencies were telling him, and Sadaam was telling ANYONE who would listen, that Iraq had WMD's. And Bush thought that if he didn't do something about it, and Sadaam actually used them (as he had in the past) that he would be damned by the world. So Bush was in a damned if he does, damned if he didn't situation. So he took the proactive route, held people accountable for their agreements, and did what he thought was right.

But that couldn't be the case. My TV keeps telling me that the "World Opinion" thinks that Bush is pure evil. TV and "World Opinion" couldn't possibly be wrong, could they?

Eki

15th January 2010, 17:55

No but you condemned leaders for.

Which CLEARLY FDR and Churchill did.
Don't misquote me. I wrote:

Only those who start wars believing they are gods themselves or believe God will approve it and protect them .
That means those who BELIEVE GOD WILL APPROVE STARTING A WAR.

Bush did not start the war against Iraq. Sadaam did by not just cooperating with the cease fire agreement he signed back in 1990. And the Afghan regime did attack the US, they knew what Al-Qaeda was up to and by doing nothing to stop it they gave tacit approval.

You are free to believe what you want.

Easy Drifter

15th January 2010, 18:13

As usual when Eki gets himself in a bind or really called out he totally changes the direction of the thread invariably attacking Bush.
He still hasn't answered Tony's question or provided any sort of proof to back his claim the US was behind the assasination in Iran.
In the meantime in Eki's democratic paradise of Iran another cleric who doesn't toe the 'party' line has been detained.
Eki you really should give your half brother a little credit.

Eki

15th January 2010, 18:35

He still hasn't answered Tony's question

I have answered. At least twice, just scroll back and see. Meanwhile Tony hasn't answered my question even once.

chuck34

15th January 2010, 19:34

You are free to believe what you want.

That has been working SO well for you.

anthonyvop

15th January 2010, 19:34

I have answered. At least twice, just scroll back and see. Meanwhile Tony hasn't answered my question even once.

Indulge me.

Explain to me and everyone else how Iran is a free and open DEMOCRACY!!!

F1boat

15th January 2010, 21:14

France is a wonderful country in a lot of ways, but they have their foilbles, and they can be dismissive of anyone who isn't French. They are not the beacon of light towards minorities either....

Also rather socialist in how they conduct their business affairs...but it works for them..so viva la France!!! Keep it there....and not over here.

Strange. My friend is a Bulgarian and hasn't noticed dismissal... About minorities, they have problem with them, but some of the minorities people are quite violent as well.
About the business thing, I prefer their way to your way, no offense, just my opinion.

Mark in Oshawa

15th January 2010, 23:43

Strange. My friend is a Bulgarian and hasn't noticed dismissal... About minorities, they have problem with them, but some of the minorities people are quite violent as well.
About the business thing, I prefer their way to your way, no offense, just my opinion.

The riots in Paris by the Muslim youth was created because the French have more or less put all their minorites in ghetto's, and not really given them jobs in the great French Society.

As for how they do business, it is great for the worker who doesn't care to work more than 35 hours a week, but the cracks of such a controlled society are starting to show. People cannot get ahead, or are not rewarded for hard work and indgenuity. Companies WONT pay overtime or allow it. And yet the country had 10% unemployment BEFORE the downturn of the economy.

It is a wonderful nation, but if I want my hard work to be rewarded and my capitalist ideas for a business to be nurtured, I don't emigrate to France....