The other night I was checking out some posts, and cam across a couple of posts that made me think of the Nazis of late 30's Germany. The only problem was, They were American.
They were laughing about taking over IRAQ, Making it the 51st state. The beginning of the American Empire.

Sounds Like Hess to me.
Very unamerican if you ask me.
And worse yet they consider themselves patriots, and enjoy bashing Liberals.
I am as conservative as it gets. I'm a Libertarian.
This country was not founded to be an Empire.
Homebrew
p.s. You guys know who you are.
Thats UNAMERICAN

That would be me I am thinking.. and how do you feel it is Un American?? it is posted all over from head to toe in these threads and on the news media as to whats going to happen to Iraq after the war? and Yes I was bashing Liberals as being Bashed myself...if they cannot Take it... Don't dish it Out!!!!

it's a Freedom of Speach just like the Dem. in office today/tomorrow... bashing the Bush Administration for there Stance on this Issue... instead of getting behind him and supporting the Troops....

I'm sorry if it Offended you Homebrew... but those were my feelings... and I'll dish it if I have to Take it...

Hog

Here's to freedom of speech.
But, the reason for the gulf war was an Imperialistic attack on Kuwait. You are calling for the making of an American Empire. Sounds Like the Nazi, and Japanese, propaganda of WWII.
First of all, I am not a Liberal. I also agree with alot of your posts, USAHOG. But one calling for an Expansion of the "American Empire" Geeze, listen to your self. Political extremism is bad for the country. Liberal or conservative.
You sir, are a little to the right of Attila the Hun.
Later Homebrew.

By the way,
Don't expect any more posts from me until Sunday night or Monday morning, I work 40 hours in 3 days. Every Fri, sat, and sunday.
Later Homebrew

If you can't take a joke, perhaps you shouldn't be here. The majority of the posts made on this board are friendly joking amongst brethren (and E-Chick). Get over it.

And by the way, I'll be over there, fighting for our way of life and your freedoms, all of them, while you are sitting home drinking tea and living carefree in the very environment that WE provide for you.

So, roll that in your cigar leaf and smoke it.

tarheel,

Uh, ok? Fighting in Iraq protects freedom of oil barons, not us peons. Last time I looked, there were not Iraqi battleships headed to the U.S. border. So don't overstate what you are doing there. You aren't protecting our country. Freedom of speech couldn't be further from what you are about to do. You are fighting a war for either a UN resolution or the interests of oil corporations (your choice; we've debated this here before).

John

If the US military didn't participate in every conflict that was deemed as a personal agenda, there is no telling where the world would be today. Perhaps you would like to be living as a servant on some British Lord's land, starving while he throws out the feast that he didn't want anymore because his stomach was full, or because he passed out from all of the wine he had been drinking. Everything is part of a grander scheme. Narrow-mindedness will drive us all into the ground.

Nope. I didn't say that, and I don't think it. It's just that this war is clearly not a pre-emptive, defensive war. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

John

ok

Professor,
Simply because there are no Iraqi battleships heading our way doesn't mean that our armed forces overseas are not fighting for our freedom.
How simplistic and shortsighted of you.
And to suggest that he was "overstating" what he is doing over there? Well, THAT my friend is very UNAmerican.
You are showing your true colors. And they are not red, white and blue.

tailgater,

OK, so being 'american' means blindly supporting whatever the President does? That's your insinuation here. I know you don't believe that. Admit it. Did you blindly support whatever Clinton did? No, you didn't.

Iraq is a third-world country. They aren't headed to our shores to take over the East Coast in any future you or I could imagine. That much I promise you.

Just because I said 'protecting our freedoms' was overstating the case, that does not mean there is not another way to argue for the nobility of the cause. Enforcing a UN resolution can be a noble cause; I just don't think it is in this case. But fighting for the oil industry's interests...that is fucked up and no one deserves to die for that. I worry that the latter is the case.

Don't accuse me of being unamerican unless you have some way of explaining yourself that isn't itself unamerican. Dissent is essential to democracy. Without dissent and disagreement, we'd have no democracy at all. So don't call my dissent unamerican. When you do, you look like a fascist.

This is my country just as much as it is yours. I am many generations invested in this country, so back off...you don't have a corner on being american. I live here, love people here, love the landscapes and mountains and rivers here, feel at home here, this is my native culture and language, and so on. YOU are unamerican if you want to squash my dissent.

John

woooooooo John.. Take a Chil Pill man...

you are getting a little heated over there....

get some air and then come back and Debate the Issues here....

Hog

I'm not suggesting that "anti-war" = unAmerican.
I'm telling you point blank that claiming our troops overseas are not fighting for our freedom is unAmerican.
Our troops fight and die for America.
Germany never sent battleships to the shores of America. Why then did we fight them?
Don't oversimplify the issues at stake.
Our troops are indeed fighting for our freedoms.
This pending war is indeed about our protection. Not because Saddam is on his way. But because he will be if left unchecked.
A little foresight might prove beneficial.
I hope I've explained myself. You don't seem to understand much of what I say, or perhaps you simply ignore it. Either way, I'm not suggesting that you don't speak out. Simply that you remain objective.
Also, support doesn't have to equate to "blind support" as you suggest. My loyalty is based on what I see as the facts.
Protestors seem to think they are the only objective ones. THAT, is being blind.

de·moc·ra·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies
Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
Majority rule.
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

dis·sent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-snt)
intr.v. dis·sent·ed, dis·sent·ing, dis·sents
To differ in opinion or feeling; disagree.
To withhold assent or approval.

n.
Difference of opinion or feeling; disagreement.
The refusal to conform to the authority or doctrine of an established church; nonconformity.
Law. A justice's refusal to concur with the opinion of a majority, as on a higher court. Also called dissenting opinion.


The 2 terms have nothing to do with each other.

Tailgater,

I don't think our freedoms are being defended, directly or indirectly, by this war in Iraq. That doesn't make me unamerican at all. It is a different view of the war, and I suspect we'll never agree on this. Just because I don't think the soldiers are fighting 'for our freedom' doesn't mean I don't value their lives. To the contrary, I value them so much I don't want them to die for a cause I think is not right.

Tarheel,

This is why dictionaries don't rule the world. I hate to pull the 'specialty' card here, but my writing and research is in theories of democracy. And all the theories have as an essential part the notion of dissent. Democracy, as we know, is more than a political system (certainly more than 'majority rule'...that is a definitional mistake). It is a way of life, a way a group of people live together. And we live together in a way that makes dissent necessary and essential to healthy political functioning. Do you think freedoms of speech and assembly are just thrown in there for fun? No, they aren't. I am not the hugest fan of the founding fathers as people (they were pretty bad people in many respects), but they were smart. They understood that democracy meant making room for dissent...thus the freedoms of speech and assembly. Dissent and democracy: they need each other.

Finally, usahog,

Dude, surely you know by now that things will get heated in the Miscellaneous debate forum. I gladly embrace the heat!

John

News Flash, this just in.. we're not a democracy, we're a republic. And oh yeah, we're already an empire. Anyone know what's playing at the Coliseum this afternoon?

We are a republican form of Government based on Democratic principles. Dissent is tied to democracy in that one ALWAYS has the right to disagree with one's Government and voice said disagreement whenever and wherever one pleases. In other forms of government that is often not the case. And now a prediction: The President will not pull the trigger without the backing of the UN. The UN resolution is at the heart of this issue. So how can 1 or 2 countries go off on their own to enforce a UN resolution if the UN does not endorse said action? Oh, it can be done. But that thars one slippery slope!

Yep, and it's expected to cost US $40 billion.


Hog