Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (204605)	9/28/2006 4:22:33 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"During the American Revolution, Louis XVI, the King of France, supplied the American side with all their ammunition and most of their guns. But for the help of France, we might all be subjects of the Queen. We owe the rest of the world to pass the favor on. Perhaps I am an optimist and an idealist, but your pessimism and cynicism is far more unrealistic." What is it about those of you who continue to "believe" that prevents you from using analogies correctly? Let me make it simple. In the Middle East, using your analogy, the Iranians and the Syrians are the French. We're the British. How'd that work out? And, just to point out that your analogy illustrates the opposite of the point you're trying to make, the British had the same culture and religion that we had, many of them were our relatives, and we still fought them like wildcats. And the French gave us arms and a few men. They didn't come in shooting and take over our governance. They didn't tell us how to treat our women and write a constitution for us filled with French values. They weren't directly responsible for the deaths of a significant percentage of our women and children. They weren't suspected of trying to take our natural resources. They didn't have decades long history of supporting corrupt and cruel dictators in America. Shall I go on? Ed

To: Ilaine who wrote (204605)	9/29/2006 4:30:32 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

This history stuff gets interesting. I always thought anything that happened before I was born was so ancient that it should be consigned to history, aka the rubbish bin. Which is still true, but I find that there are interesting things rattling around in the closet of history. I didn't know Louis XVI was the provisioner of the American revolution. Which is, as they say, a situation that those who failed to learn from were doomed to repeat. The American criminals who usurped King George III could only do so because of French help, and France at the time was the world's major power, more or less. One of them anyway. The other was Great Britain, which was entering the times of the biggest and best empire in human history. Sure there are whiny people who like to denigrate it now. But it brought more benefit and happiness to more people than any other effort ever. Hang on, I'm getting side-tracked. My point is that Louis XVI thought he was a clever chap, giving the British their own Vietnam in the USA by supporting the Mujahideen jihad against King George III, his arch enemy. The revolution was a success. The King was defeated and a new era of freedom for the democratic average bloke [n-word people need not apply]. Not long later, the local yokels in La Belle France obviously decided that if it was good enough for the Americans to have a revolution in favour of liberty, egalite, fraternite, it was good enough for them too. Hey presto, the tumbrils started rolling and Louis XVI found himself with a greatly reduced life expectancy. So, silly Louis XVI thought he was really smart, sticking it to the English by supporting criminal American terrorists, when he should have supported King George III against the Americans. Similarly, Ronald Raygun and King George I should have supported Gorby in suppressing the evil-doing Islamic Jihadists in Afghanistan, instead of helping Osama and co defeat the good guy. Now the revolutionaries have turned on King George II and seem likely to defeat him. Being subjects of the Queen is quite pleasant CB. It's a bit weird for dogma-bound Catholic Irish types who have suckled on stories of Paul Revere and the wonderful freedom to own slaves in the American colonies. Once upon a time, in my youth, part of my leftist ideas was that the monarchy was an absurdity - a ridiculous artifact of history. Now, I'm not too worried and even quite like it. I feel a bit sorry for them. Born to it and loaded with expectations by the community which they feel obliged to fulfill. But they are well-paid and can abdicate if push comes to shove and they really can't cope. They don't have to lie, cheat and steal their way to power. Their main personal purpose is stability and a harmonious community which isn't going to roll out the tumbrils. When push comes to shove and the politicians and community come to blows, there is somebody who is above the fray who can provide some leadership to elections to decide who should run the show and provide an interim government while that's decided. So, there you have it. Louis XVI was the author of his own demise by supporting the evil-doers. Plus ca change, noblesse oblige, casus beli, inter alia, ipso facto, ultra vires, etcetera, and other fancy latin legalisms, Mqurice