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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (46293)	2/9/1999 1:02:00 PM
From: Mike M2	Respond to of 132070

Yiwu, the victors write the history -g- . Actually what I should have said the vast industrial might and oil & food production of the US hastened the end of the war along with our military might and air power. The resources of the US saved untold millions of lives by ending the war sooner than would otherwise have been the case. I guess one could argue that China had the numbers to eventually beat the Japanese and the Russian state was so vast that they could move inland and regroup but if the US remained out of the war many more millions would have died IMO. Mike

To: RealMuLan who wrote (46293)	2/9/1999 1:19:00 PM
From: Ralph W.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Yiwu - Maybe there was a time when people here were pleased that their vote would elect someone to represent them. This is much less so the case today. Yes, our vote elects, but representation is another matter. We have little voice in determining who the candidates will be (money has a very large voice), and once elected our "representatives" seem to serve private interest groups and their own agendas much more than they serve us. Much the same can be said for those working in government who were not elected. Ralph

To: RealMuLan who wrote (46293)	2/9/1999 1:34:00 PM
From: Merritt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

YZ: Your point about the Russians and Chinese having a different view of who "saved" the world is well taken, IMHO. The losses suffered by the Russians was staggering, by any standards, and their resistance to the German army allowed the Allies to gain strength while the Germans were weakened by the Russian winter. And the rape of Nanking was a terrible thing, one that we in the U.S. have never truly appreciated, IMHO. From what I can remember, the conflict in China during WWII was never given much coverage in our press, and for that matter, hasn't been treated with any depth since then, either. Why that is so, I don't know - during the war it could be attributed to a lack of reporters allowed access to the area, and I suppose something similar could be said for the era after, but I'm not sure that's really a valid argument. The U.S. people, perhaps because of our press - or perhaps because of our nature the press gives us what we want, kind of a chicken/egg thing - have something of a provincial attitude. To say that we (the U.S.) "saved" the world, is a gross overstatement...but we did supply the men and material that tipped the balance in the Allies' favor. Prior to our entry it did appear the Axis would prevail...especially if Hitler had maintained the status of his non-aggression pact with Stalin. But without the Russian front, even with the American's entry, the outcome would have been in doubt...or at least prolonged. Unfortunately, I'm as ignorant as the next person in the U.S. (maybe more so) as far as knowing the contribution that China made in the war effort - other than imagining how many Japanese must have been required, and thus removed from the rest of the fighting, to occupy and administer such a vast country. It's too bad we haven't had a better flow of information - it might have led to a better understanding and better relations. Maybe that's the greatest promise of the Internet. Best regards, Merritt

To: RealMuLan who wrote (46293)	2/9/1999 5:18:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

>>>>>But I think the thing Americans are proud of the most about their systems is that they can elect public officials who will represent them, or am I wrong?<<<<< I am proudest of the fact that our government is one of law, not one of strong men. Even a weak, insignificant woman like Paula Jones has the right to sue the President, and the right to her day in court. To a great extent, the government is made up of career civil servants, who are not elected. The bribery and corruption that are expected elsewhere in the world are not tolerated here. (I am from Louisiana, so I know that there is corruption in the U.S., too, but it is considered shocking, not business as usual). If a private company which has contracts with the government cheats, the whistle-blower laws encourage people to tell the truth, and they are rewarded financially. If you file a civil rights complaint against your employer in the United States, it is against the law for your employer to fire you. I know that power corrupts, but in the United States, we have a legal system which gives the people ways to fight corruption. That is what I am proudest of.