George Washingtons Potomac crossing was not an event that testifies to the poverty of the colonists. The third Reich had plenty of money, but yet how many of their soldiers perished in the Russian snows from exposure and hunger?
Yes the Brits were the ulitimate war machine at the time, but being an underdog doesn't mean that we were without resources. Fortunately for us, war was still considered a gentlemans concern. Front row fires, Second row loads, Third row clears barrel for next round, fourth row checks weapon, and so on untill the last row which was drinking tea until the next front firing row returns to the rear to receive refreshment.
The colonials were fortunate in that they were not as organized, and thus were using guerilla tactics. This was the Brits undoing. Of course soldiers who were captured by the colonials, were made to promise leaving the country back to England and not to return. Those who promised, were released.
Your guess again reply dissappoints me. I am debating an issue with you, and have the impression that you are becoming rude. If I am mistaken, I apologize, since I find it beneficial to all to remain civil.
Your rhetoric concerning the families of the deceased in Kenya and Tanzania have nothing to do with my question. I wanted to know what your experiences in such countries were if any. If you do not have any, just say so. From your statement, I am lead to believe that this is the case. It is not uncommon for people who have no such experiences to maintain similiar views as yours regardless of what country they are from. As far as those that were killed in the embassy bombings, their attackers were not locals, so the feelings of the families of these victims towards the local population need not be inflamatory, as the local peoples they worked with also suffered. This is witnessed by those of us who saw they rescue and salvage efforts of the local fire departments and military.
If your views are based upon personal experiences abroad, it would be interesting to know them to understand you and position better.
I too have moved on a couple of times when my employer proved to be involved in certain activities that I felt would cause me grief if I remaine in his employ. Of course I have seen criminals revered by local populations, because the bulk of the revenues from their crimes go to feed and clothe their people. I have seen destitute villages become thriving towns on the resources of a couple of kinpin drug lords. Try and convince the people who are now able to feed their children,clothe them,imunize them from disease, and even send them to newly built schools that these Crooks are scum and should be eliminated. I can support such crooks, but I will not condemn a person for applying for a job teaching children at a school that was built with drug money. Or the docter who gets hired to imunize the children of the area and take care of the sick. Since I am well off compared to the rest of the world, I do not have to partake of such things, I have the option as you do to walk away and not support such activities. Many people do not, and they are drug dealers, or pro drugs. They are just honest people trying to survive in this world the best way they can.
I now what it is like to not be able to feed your family. It is humiliating. Having to rely on the charity of others is a humbling experience.
Known criminals have businesses all over America, and are thriving. John Gaddi is a known criminal who eventually went to jail, but how long was he known to be a criminal. Of course the guy who took his place at the head of the table is just as known. Is he in jail yet?
Problem is, in a way we do support drugs. We let the small timers go, because we think we are going to get the big fish. So if we find a methlab, we let it work sometimes months before we strike, because we want the guy at the top. Meanwhile how much of this junk is produced and marketed and sold while we wait, and when we bust the top guy, how long is it before another one takes his place. We even make deals with dealers to get to their suppliers. Ok dealer walks, his supplier goes to jail, dealer finds another supplier. Why not put the dealer in jail no deal.
Start selling flour all over the city and disrupt the whole drug market. People start to get suspiscious. Don't know who has the real stuff, and wham, they start keeping their money. Lower the quality so badly that even a stone hard junky kicks it to the curb.
You actually believe that the Sudanese government if they had a terrorist in their hands would let him go and pat him on the back and say good job. That is what our government is telling us. Of course you don't believe the president. They were pressured by the US and other Western entities to run Labin out of the county, which they did. Sounds like compliance to me.
So we run the Escobars out of the US so they can be dealt with by Columbian officials, and then the Columbians can go ahead and bomb Los Angeles east because the Escobars still have a going concern of drug production going on there.
We say we oppose racism, but what are we doing about it? We say we oppose drugs, but what are we doing about it?(imagine answering that question if allegations that President Clinton uses or used cocained prove to be true), we say that we oppose terrorism, but what are we really doing about it within our own borders. How many radical Muslim fundamentalist live in the US? Of these, how many support terrorist actions against the US? Why are they not rooted out and killed? Of course one could argue that we are working on it, but the country that decides to do the job quickly for us thinks that we are too slow or are supporting them, even after they have told us to do something about it.
I guess the Sudanese would like to rule their own country and work to solve their own problems instead of calling the US and say " Hey we got a problem, can you obliterate it for us." That is a bit egotistical to think that other countries "need" our help.
Sure I would prefer a flat tax of 10% across the board including corporate, and not allowable deductions and or write offs. Less evation, and as you say no middle man. I am a realist. As long as a large portion of our population desires social security etc etc, then the Government will always go with the median voter. Thus, if my tax dollars are going to have to support a social scheme, I at least want a say in what it is going towards.
Your "social conservative" bit was uncalled for. I understand that you have strong views, but just like doughboy, it doesn't help your argument by dumping on me that way.
I don't see why one cannot have compassion for ones brother even if he should give his life for the taking of another. I don't see where hate and bitterness and the desire for revenge can bring closure to anyone who has suffered so.
Dug |
