I give that five Rebel yells (out of five).
You would definitely give my Nigerian friend fits with this. LOL!
BTW - he's got a PhD in engineering, so he's not your "stupid, lazy" type of person.
Nate and JAC, have i told you lately that i love y'all?...well this post reminds me that i do!
Anyone who can say with a straight face that Africa is capable of governing itself peacefully and productively... is either a drooling idiot.. or totally divorced from reality.
Bite your tongue!
South Africa once was.
-
Don't you think that had something to do with the European domination of South Africa?
You may have just described the only path to "peace" in the Middle East: Bitch-slap their fanatic asses into WIMPering submission, take everything they got (which was handed out to them by U.S. anyway) and put the survivors on reservations.
Modern variation on what my brother calls "the great, white way."
My solution to the Middle East: Bomb the whole thing into a fucking parking lot. Will we look crazy? Certainly. But, people will think twice about running a plane through one of our buildings again.
Nate: "In truth I am not in favor of self-determination for all... I only favor it for those with a demonstrated ability to actually govern themselves."
Well, I guess that counts out the USofA, too, then!
BTW, that whole "it's for their own good" principle seems to fly right in the face of the whole idea of Liberty, don't you think?
Freedom also includes the right to screw yourself over. Or are you just trying to "think of the children"?
Man, I really hope you're just being facetious in this post, Nate. Otherwise, you just blew away all justification for the Revolutionary War, and for Southern states' right to secede! Because the Government knows what's best for us, right?
You were right on track with the rest of the post, though.
Love the pullout from the U.N. idea.
I'll go w/ George Washington--stay away from foreign entanglements.
Wes,
The government doesn't know what's best for us, but I have no problem with it decicing what's best for them.
-
Waterboy
Reading comprehension is an area you may consider for improvement.
Southerners are far more capabale of governing themselves than Yankees are. After all, we wrote the consitution. We created the United States in its original form.
It was you yankee bastards that screwed it up. First Lincoln, then FDR.
Nate: "Reading comprehension is an area you may consider for improvement"
Said the pot to the kettle.
Look back very carefully over my words, Nate. I know it's still early, but I think you can do this.
YOU SAID: I only favor it for those with a demonstrated ability to actually govern themselves."
I SAID: ...you just blew away all justification ...for Southern states' right to secede...the Government knows what's best for us
That was the problem, Lincoln (and the Northern states) didn't think the Southern states should have the degree of self-determination they felt they had the right to, that they couldn't "govern" themselves like that, yes? So Lincoln had to go in and show the South what was best for them, yes?
That's the same justification you were using for the US colonizing the rest of the world. England, Australia, Switzerland...all of it is screwed up royally, huh?
Wrong.
Lincoln had no worry of the South degenerating into a chaotic hell hole like Africa or South America.
He wanted the tax money. He wanted the power.
You're talking perception. I'm talking reality.
If anyone in North America has proven that they can't be trusted to govern themselves, it's the yankees. You meddle in everyone's affairs. Be it your next door neighbor, the guy down the street, or the Nation across the ocean.
Hell will freeze over before yankees as a group learn to mind their own damned business.
England, Aussyland, and the swiss have all demonstrated that they can govern themselves effectively.
The middle east has not. South America has not. Africa has not.
There is a difference. The South had also demonstrated that it could do the same, after all, it was doing just that before the Constitution was ever ratified.
>South Africa once was.
Don't you think that had something to do with the European domination of South Africa?
Let's see, before the Europeans showed up they were hacking each other to death with machetes and selling the survivors into slavery.
The Europeans show up, give them powered wigs and teach them to build wooden houses and boil their water before drinking it, then leave.
Now, they're hacking each other to death with machetes and selling the survivors into slavery.... and it's the European's fault???
I think he was trying to point out that the only reason for the brief period of Civilization in South Africa was due to the work of Euro's.
I am sure glad I found your blog Nate. Now I can name at least one other individual who really understands why Lincoln declared war.
In regards to the rest of the world, a new age of colonialism has been proposed by a number of intellectuals in the 3rd world for the last decade. In fact, they have revived a version of the 'white man's burden' that expects the 1st world to come back to the 3rd world and stop the their native silliness.
Based on waterboy's logic, the US could never directly advocate or support self determination in foreign countries because that would be meddling. According to this logic, a banana republic junta deposing a democractic government is just more of that freedom stuff. Without US meddling in the last century there would be a lot less self determination in the world.
Nate: Lincoln had no worry of the South degenerating into a chaotic hell hole like Africa or South America.
That's not what I said. I said the Northern States didn't agree that the South had the right to govern themselves as they saw fit (i.e., to secede). That's why they backed Lincoln, despite any other motives he may have had.
...yankees. You meddle in everyone's affairs. Be it your next door neighbor, the guy down the street, or the Nation across the ocean.
*BOGGLE* Yankees meddle with the "Nation across the ocean", but you want to colonize the entire friggin world, and somehow that's NOT meddling?!?
DHC: "Based on waterboy's logic, the US could never directly advocate or support self determination in foreign countries because that would be meddling"
Again, that's not what I said. Nate is talking about colonizing the world and stealing their wealth, not "advocating or supporting self-determination".
Not exactly a paragon of benevolence, that plan. Try again, sport.
Not colonizing the world. Colonizing the parts of the world that are locked in chaos due to the fact that they are in capable of self-determination.
Big difference.
fuck 'em. Colonize 'em all. The one's that aren't already, anyway.
-
Nate: "Not colonizing the world. Colonizing the parts of the world..."
Sorry, Nate. I read your written words "...conquering the world and looting it as we see fit" and that you backed your bro "...and just as soon have the rest of the world be a US colony"...didn't realize I was supposed to change the meaning of "the world" to "part of the world".
So when JAC says, "Fuck 'em. Colonize 'em all", he really only means part of them, right?
I follow you, now. I stand corrected.
JACIII means what he wrote.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should militarily declare a war of conquest on the world, but I do think any other country should viewed with an eye toward screwing their brains out and our foreign policy should reflect that attitude. If that bothers 'em too much, well, THEN we defend ourselves and declare war unless they want to become a protectorait, er, colony.
Let's start with the french.
-
Commenting by HaloScan
