Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: vyper on June 11, 2004, 08:29:23 pm
-
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0611-02.htm
-
*annoucer voice*
And let the ****storm begin!
I'm not touching this one again. I just don't feel like getting involved in the ideological arguments to come.
-
vyper: you think I couldn't pull out a dozen different articles on Reagan at a moment's notice? just let it be man. give it a few weeks or months , and then we'll have a proper scruffle. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is about speaking truthfully about the dead, but some people here will have issues with it, so better to just hold off.
-
hmmm... so you don't want this thirty seven and one half foot long poll either...
well I sure as hell an't touching it
-
UBAR NEW!!!!!!!! WANT INTRODUCETION!!!
:WTF; is this smilee For
-
Dead people piss me off.
-
Originally posted by ??????
UBAR NEW!!!!!!!!
I never would have guessed.
-
I just dont see how one can speak ill of a good president and a gentleman...
-
no! no one touch that remark. just don't. let it be guys, let it be.
-
*hides behind the couch*
-
Tards.
-
why are the guys in those weird shiney suits over there lineing the walls with the same material used in experemental fusion reactors?
..hey, does it seem warm in here to anyone else?
-
You disappoint me all :p
-
Most of you kids don't know what it was actually like to grow up in the Reagan years. I remember, that's why it so hard to hold back on bashing him. Even in elementry/Junior high I had negative feelings for him. However let the dead rest, we still have to live with his "legacies"...
-
Like the modern Republcian party and the national debt?
Oh, wait, I thought I was to stay out of this thread...
-
Originally posted by Bri_Dog
Dead people piss me off.
Live people piss me off.
-
At least I am not a bigot, I hate ALL humans equally (Live or dead!) ;)
-
Originally posted by .::Tin Can::.
I just dont see how one can speak ill of a good president and a gentleman...
You know who else is dead too?
That's right! (http://eer-music.com/pics2/hitler.jpg) lol godwin
Kidding. Heads of state deliberately put themselves into position where their decisions and stances can and, inevitably, will be criticized.
-
You're comparing Hitler to Ronald Reagan? :wtf:
-
Bush! Let's all complain that Bush is a ****ing moron! C'mon... it'll be fun!
-
That fact is already well established, Raa. But then again...
-
That Bush, he such an arse... :nervous:
Hey, why didn't Osama sleep with his wife??
Uhh DUH!!... He found Bush...
:shaking:
please stop this topic
-
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/586/understanding-josua-2.jpg)
Edit: For ionia23:
(http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1980/her_place.jpg)
-
I am so not even going to ask wtf the point of the above picture is. That thing disturbs the hell out of me.
I grew up during the Reagan years and currently live in his legacy. You don't hear a lot of people talking smack because a. it's unnecessarily malicious, b. overzealous patriotism. Some people were crazy about the guy, they can have all the time they want as far as I'm concerned.
I don't mourn his passing, i celebrate it. Why? Because it was a freakin' mercy for him and his family, politics aside. Alzheimer's is as cruel as it gets. If any of you feel he brought some stupid karmic thing on himself, he paid it in full with interest.
-
Reagan was a murderer and a liar. He allowed the AIDS epidemic get out of control, which makes him personally responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people. He also financed BRUTAL groups like Unita, so that makes him an accomplice to their murdering of tens of thousands of innocent civilians.
In addition to all that, he was also responsible for the Soviets Afghanistan occupation lasting 2 years longer than it needed to. Which also makes him personally responsible for the deaths of another thousand or so people.
Given all of that, anyone who can call this murderer a "Gentleman" and/or a "great president" might as well call Stalin a saint. Free your mind.
-
Okay, let's get a few things straight here. Under Reagan, AIDS related spending doubled every year till round about 1990. You heard me D-O-U-B-L-E-D, 2x, 200% increase, ect. The Critics use this because they believe he should have spent more.
As far as what groups were financed, the adage is "The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend". In the 1980's, Reagan lead the forces of Freedom against the Evil Empire of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. His funding of less than savory groups in the Near East and other places was calculated to prevent the advance of Communism and restrict it to Easter Europe and parts of Asia. Of course he couldn't see at the time that with the fall of the USSR, Western Europe would take up the Socialist cause that was the basis of the Soviet Union.
The Soviets never occupied Afganistan, they undertook an invasion which was turned back after a period of time thanks primarily to US funding and other activites in country.
Kosh, I don't what moss covered rock you dug your mushrooms out from under but I wouldn't take any more of them. Also, get your facts straight before you run off at the mouth, kid. How old are you anyway? Definitely too young to have any first hand knowledge of what you type. Don't rely on whatever propaganda site you dug that ---- up on as fact.
*edit*
Now lookit, you done made me go and cuss.
-
Another thing, all this 'personal responsibility' crap is meaningless for a head of state as a result of legal policy decisions. If you wanted to apply it then every trivial policy decision which might benefit millions but disadvantage a few would be avoided and nothing would ever get done.
Calling Raegan a murderer is childish, not to mention wrong.
-
Morality has no place on the world stage. :nervous:
Ach I can't fault him for defending his country's interests but let's not pretend it was done nicely. Just like today, we (western world) rape the natural resources and people of less fortunate countries for our own benefit.
It just so happens America has done most of it recently being the hyperpower n' all.
-
Originally posted by SadisticSid
Another thing, all this 'personal responsibility' crap is meaningless for a head of state as a result of legal policy decisions. If you wanted to apply it then every trivial policy decision which might benefit millions but disadvantage a few would be avoided and nothing would ever get done.
Calling Raegan a murderer is childish, not to mention wrong.
Reagan recognised the Khmer Rouge as the official government of Cambodia even after they were ousted and the mass killing that went on there came to light. Reagan funded and trained right wing government death sqauds in Honduras, El Salvador and other latin american countrys. Reagan supported and backed Indonesia while they commited genocide in East Timor. Reagan sold arms to Irans Khomeni to fund right wing terrorists in Nicaragua. Reagan backed Saddam Hussein and sold him chemical weapons which he used to gas the Iranians and Kurds. Reagan backed Pinochet, Marcos, Duavalier and onced asked how people could turn their back on apartheid south africa.
None of these are legal policy decisions, nor are they trivial, nor did they benefit millions and disadvantage a few. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of people died at the hands of Reagans allies, all because he considered communism or anything that even resembled it to be "evil". The man wasnt great, he was a uncaring bastard at the very least.
Liberator, personally I think anyone who thinks of somebody with opposing political views as themselves as evil but somebody who tortures and murders people, who builds monuments out of human skulls or who gasses a whole town of innocent people as part of the "forces of freedom" is a ****ed up little c*nt, but its pretty obvious we dont share the same sort of feelings on these matters.
-
Originally posted by Gank
Liberator, personally I think anyone who thinks of somebody with opposing political views as themselves as evil but somebody who tortures and murders people, who builds monuments out of human skulls or who gasses a whole town of innocent people as part of the "forces of freedom" is a ****ed up little c*nt, but its pretty obvious we dont share the same sort of feelings on these matters.
Curiosity: Is there any political leader who meets with your approval 100%? Any?
-
Do you approve of any politician 100%? Kindof a high rating to give anyone, politicians in particular. Aung San Suu Kyi would probably rank the highest I could think of offhand but theres probably a few others equally good if not better. Wei Jingsheng, José Ramos-Horta, Xanana Gusmao spring to mind though I doubt I'd agree with everything they had to say.
-
Calling Raegan a murderer is childish, not to mention wrong.
No, it's not. It's an accurate view based on undisputed facts.
Kosh, I don't what moss covered rock you dug your mushrooms out from under but I wouldn't take any more of them. Also, get your facts straight before you run off at the mouth, kid. How old are you anyway? Definitely too young to have any first hand knowledge of what you type. Don't rely on whatever propaganda site you dug that ---- up on as fact.
Why don't you grow up? I have a great deal more knowledge, first hand or otherwise than most people. Turn off Rush Limbaugh for a few minutes and listen to the truth. The so called "propaganda site" of mine are numerous reliable and ACCURATE sources.
And I didn't make you cuss, you did that all by yourself.
-
Just let him live in his fantasy world, Kosh.
-
You are, but the fact that he would get so worked up over my opinion is pathetic, childish and wrong.
-
Okay, if Reagan was so bad, how did he carry 49 of 50 states in the 1984 election? Only Minnesota went for the other guy, and then only by ~2500 votes.
Just because they are numerous and possibly reliable doesn't make them accurate. Your "facts" just aren't lining up with history.
You are coming off as a petulant child who just wants to stir up trouble and make a name for himself by starting an argument. That, IMO, makes you a twit to be ignored.
-
Liberator: how about you refute his facts? You sa they don't "line up with history", whatever that means, but they are history. None of what Gank said is disputed, it is accepted by everyone, the US government past and present included, as fact.
The fact is, Reagan is responsible for the murder of a great many people. "Stopping communism" is not a valid excuse to off thousands of people.
I would like to see you defend even a single of these crimes. I don't mean that rhetorically at all. Just pick an accusation and try to explain why the benefit was greater than the cost. The interesting thing is, Reagan, as President of the US, had no right at all to sacrifice even a single foreign life to further America's ambitions. You can kill your own citizens all you like, but at no point was he given the authority to intervene in the governance of sovereign nations.
So, just pick one and get started. That goes for any other Reaganite on here.
-
Thank you Rictor. And would somebody please tell "Liberator" to stop calling me names. I do not believe it is appropriate or neccisary.
If I really wanted to make trouble I could easily raise all kinds of hell about almost anything. I posted an opinion, that does NOT give anyone the right to start personally attacking me.
-
well lets see here, I do credit him with stoping the USSR, thats a very good thing, gives him lots of point, but he did a lot of rather not to good stuf to get there, some of wich probly didn't need to be done, and there he looses a lot of points, ending a 50 year long nuclear standoff capable of anialateing all civilisation in five minutes is something that you'd realy have to work at to offset... I consider Regan a passable presedent.
-
can you deny that it was gorbachev, and not reagan, that truly ended the cold war? Reagan was President at the time, given, but he didn't really do anythng more to end the Cold War than any of the preceding presidents. Gorbachev saw that Communism was done for, especially in the form of the USSR, and he essentially gave up.
There is a difference between "winning" and "the other team threw in the towel"...
-
"can you deny..."
right there I can tell you are underestemateing me.
-
I'm afraid you folks are slightly mistaken. Reagan won because he devised a rock-bottom simple strategy for ending the Red Threat. He brought the economic might of the United States of America to bear and spent them into the ground. That's why they "threw in the towel", they couldn't keep up with the spending packages that Reagan initiated while at the same time initiating the largest peacetime economic growth cycle in modern history. Not to mention, the Soviet was genuinely afraid of SDI.
When Reagan took office Inflation was at 21%(this is bad, BTW), Interest Rates were in the double digits and there was a general malaise on the nation. When he left Inflation and Interest Rates were down and national morale was high. He made it okay to be an American again. More to the point, he did it all by sticking to his guns and not giving an inch.
Therein lies the biggest problem with politics today; there is too much compromise. Reagan was great because he didn't compromise, he showed the nation where he wanted to go and took us there.
Contrary to what you've heard, there is a Shining City on a Hill and we're it.
-
Rictor, Liberator: bull****.
The cold war ended because of the russian internal stuggles and the collapsing of USSR. And Reagan had nothing to do with that, mind you, USSR and USA had minimal economical bounds.
Where the **** do you learn history? On Cornflake adverts?
-
The whole reason why interest rates were so high was because inflation was getting out of control. You can thank the chairman of the Federal Reserve at the time (Paul Volker (sp?)) for increasing the interest rates so much and causing a recession. On the other hand it did drasticly decrease inflation.
-
Originally posted by Nico
Where the **** do you learn history? On Cornflake adverts?
pah! that would be foolish
/*picks up cocoa puffs box to learn of the war of 1812*/
-
:wtf:
I'm so glad certain people aren't my students in my history class. *shrugs*
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Contrary to what you've heard, there is a Shining City on a Hill and we're it.
Holy **** man you come out with some class a meaningless ****e.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Therein lies the biggest problem with politics today; there is too much compromise. Reagan was great because he didn't compromise, he showed the nation where he wanted to go and took us there.
Contrary to what you've heard, there is a Shining City on a Hill and we're it.
Hitler, Mao & Stalin didn't compromise either. I'd hardly classify them as great men.
Frankly, you're full of pish.
-
There'll be no Shining City outside our heads until we get one inside our heads.
It is true that Russia spent itself into oblivion keeping up with the USA, but it wasn't devised or a cunning plan or anything, as much as sheer bloody stupidity, on both sides. If American citizens realised just how much of their money has been piled into weapons that cannot be used for defensive purposes, only for attack, money that could have been spent on rebuilding your economy improving life for the lower 15% of society etc, I think you would be appalled.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Frankly, you're full of pish.
Ah the Glasgow input. ;)
-
The reason that the USSR collapsed? Because it never was truly stable.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
If American citizens realised just how much of their money has been piled into weapons that cannot be used for defensive purposes, only for attack, money that could have been spent on rebuilding your economy improving life for the lower 15% of society etc, I think you would be appalled.
"People are poor because they did it to themselves, it's god's will! Praise the lord! Jesus CEO!"
The above statement is sadly what quite a few people believe...
Now, I'm not intending to turn this into a religious debate thread I'm just stating that there's quite a few people who are using their religion to justify their personal wealth. Damn Calvinists...
-
People are poor because they are too damn shiftless to get a job that pays or move somewhere where they can.
-
"People are poor because they did it to themselves, it's god's will! Praise the lord! Jesus CEO!"
:rolleyes:
Now all that's left is the predestination bull...
-
Maybe they can't afford to move? Maybe they don't have the credentials to get a job that pays well and cannot afford to get them?
-
Feel like insulting Venom today, Liberator?
-
Not always, I agree, you have your percentage of leeches just as all state baseed societies do, my own included, but a lot of employment problems are caused through some very vicious circles, for example, in many poorer neighborhoods you fit in or are kicked down, that's gang culture for you. Teenagers in these areas have to fit in, and coupled with the need to be accepted, will often get involved in things they don't want to.
It's easy to say 'Well, they could have said 'no'', but the question is could they? Could you? Your Father is a junkie, your mother is seeing about 3 different men (to avoid confusion, I am talking of our fictional character here ;) ), these people, whatever they are doing, are the closest thing in the world you have to friends, they depend on each other with their lives because they are all they have.
American Law is very tough and unforgiving, that's fine and good where needed, Britain could do with some more of it in places, but looking at American Cop Shows, they always seem to project the image 'Obey, or we'll kick your arse hard'.
Once you have a conviction for drugs or vandalism you will find it much much harder to get a job, and often cannot afford to move to where there is work (and why should you have to leave your home anyway?) your welfare pays for your rent and food and precious little else. Eventually, you marry, and have a kid, who grows up in exactly the same cycle. Once you are in it, it's very very hard to break out again :(
-
Originally posted by Nico
Rictor, Liberator: bull****.
The cold war ended because of the russian internal stuggles and the collapsing of USSR. And Reagan had nothing to do with that, mind you, USSR and USA had minimal economical bounds.
Where the **** do you learn history? On Cornflake adverts?
the USSR collapsed because of domestic discontent and imperial overextenstion. What happened was, at the time, the Russian leadership said "**** it, we're done for", because of all these factors. I never, ever claimed that Gorbachev dismantled a prefectly healthy USSR cause he was a nice guy, they were down and out. Perhaps you might want to read what I said; just a thought.
The same is slowly happening to America. Granted, its not likely to all come crashing spectacuarly down, but in the modern world, America can't keep up this pace. Just think of what would happen if the Asian economy decided it liked the Euro better than the dollar...And then, they will have no one to blame but themselves, same as the Russians.
-
Lib, listen to me very carefully. You can not place your nation, your people, your whatever, on a pedestal higher than anyone else, for no apparent reason, and still claim that you are of an objective opinion.
Imagine if a Martian landed on Earth today, read all of human history, right up to the present day. I mean, the straght facts, no rhetoric. Would he consider America to be Camelot the Shining City? Hell no.
You believe that America is this and that, despite historical evidence to the contrary. How can you claim, for example, that America stands for freedom, when it has overthrown countless foreign governments, democratically elected ones at that, and to this day continues to oppose self determination around the world. This is just one example. If the US forgoes self-determination in favour of its national interests, than you can not possibly claim it stands for freedom. Simple.
The same can be said for peace, justice and all those good things. When you arrive at a situtation when history contradicts you prejudiced opinion, either positive or negative, ten you can either decide that yes, you were wrong, and change your opinion, or you can develop an elaborate set of lies and rationalization to compensate for the discrepancy. The latter leads to nothing but ignorance.
I'm not even using this as an attack. Its pretty clear that arguing to win is a pointless excerise. Arguing to learn, now thats a different story.
-
Pride comes before a fall.
-
Originally posted by Kosh
Maybe they can't afford to move? Maybe they don't have the credentials to get a job that pays well and cannot afford to get them?
:nod:
That kind of occured to me as well.........
-
He (Lib) must be taking the piss guys... surely...
-
I didn't want to start yet another political topic, so I have posted this line here, this being the first political topic I could find ;)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040618/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saudi_kidnapped_american
If this is true, then any advantage that might have been gained by doubts raised over the Chris Berg video have now been shattered. Fools, to themselves, to their 'beliefs' and to the world.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
I didn't want to start yet another political topic, so I have posted this line here, this being the first political topic I could find ;)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040618/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saudi_kidnapped_american
If this is true, then any advantage that might have been gained by doubts raised over the Chris Berg video have now been shattered. Fools, to themselves, to their 'beliefs' and to the world.
The pictures and video are already out. It is.
-
Then, considering he was wearing an orange jacket as well, much like Nicholas Berg, any doubts I had about his killing are now gone. He was murdered by Terrorists in cold blood, just as this man was. No matter how much I disagree with what America is doing, this is no longer about War or Religion or Oil, it's about race. Terrorists don't care who they kill, Hindu, Muslim, Christian or Buddhist, Male or Female, as long as they are from a country which they view as oppressive.
The first killing was an Italian, and now 2 Americans, and no doubt more will follow. That isn't fighting for a voice, or moving against the oppressors. This is racism with a knife, they knew their demands would not be met, they just wanted some kind of 'justification' to mimic the Berg murder.
-
Originally posted by Janos
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/586/understanding-josua-2.jpg)
Edit: For ionia23:
(http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1980/her_place.jpg)
what in the name of **** is that!?
and wtf's the top picture? i don't get it. are they raping that woman? ..........disturbing.
-
Charlie White photographs vulnerability.
Using a humanoid puppet he calls "complete fragility manifest in a body," White presents human frailty through a fictional character, much as a novelist might.
As White tells Jacki Lyden for Weekend All Things Considered, his puppet, called Joshua, helps him to explore the themes of male self-image and self-loathing. White places Joshua in a series of vulnerable situations -- at a cocktail party or a lover's house -- and photographs the scene.
Originally posted by Flipside
it's about race.
Originally posted by Flipside
Terrorists don't care who they kill, Hindu, Muslim, Christian or Buddhist, Male or Female, as long as they are from a country which they view as oppressive.
Its not about race, its about nationality. Big difference.
-
Either way, I was angry at the time, but whether it is dressed up as racism or nationism, that difference isn't all that big, they murderered him for where he was born and lived.