Noah's Ark

Tim,

I have to agree with you there. Pretending we don't have an illegal immigration problem is like believing in the Tooth Fairy. Of course we ARE spending billions on airport security ... staffed by folks who, although they vary widely in their training and abilities, have tightened things up somewhat. Perhaps someone can explain to me, though, why it's OK to pat down a handicapped woman from Ohio because she can't walk through the metal detector, but it's not permissible to pat down an adult male from any Islamic country, because that would be "profiling".

 

Yes, this "political correctness" is a bunch of baloney. Though my profile is similar to the men who overpowered the Islamic terrorists on flight 93, I get extra attention almost every time I fly. By the way, flight 93 went down approx 35 miles from my home. Profiling makes extreme sense if we are to look at things logically instead of emotionally.

Logic does not seem to hold it's due position as it has in the past. I'm only 43 and I can see this disturbing trend in my lifetime.

You seem to have a very diplomatic & non-confrantational way about you. Could use people like that in politics. Unfortunetly, politics seems to attract the opposite. Or once in office, the power corrupts them even if they start out well intentioned.

TGoz

 

Funny, isn't it (not! ) that an adult male looking of European descent and travelling alone gets lots of attention, but if he's Middle Eastern... Oops, can't look too closely, we might offend him!

Our political system is pretty broken, in my opinion. Way too much emphasis on MTV style quicky sound bites; but then, too many of our fellow citizens don't want to think about evaluating the whole candidate, weighing his/her strengths and weaknesses in terms of how each of us would like to see the country 20 years from now. Of course, that takes devoting time to study the issues and the background of each candidate. It's easier to react to the sound bites designed to push our buttons.

You know, of course, that even after the Democrats and Republicans name their two finalists, that there are usually 4 - 8 "minor party" candidates running for President. I found one of their debates on C Span once. What a difference! They each spoke for 20 minutes, later had 10 minute rebuttals. They articulated clear proposals, criticized the ideas expressed by others, vigorously but politely, with supporting arguments and evidence (they named sources so the audience could look them up later). I found myself saying, "Why can't these guys get on the stage with the Democrat and Republican candidates, they'd clean their clocks! (That's why they're not invited, of course. )


If I sound diplomatic and nonconfrontational it's because I believe in fighting only for a worthy cause. I suspect you and longliner and most other former military types feel the same way. I've often thought we should amend the Constitution to make active duty military service a requirement for office. Those who have seen up close and understand the potential for death and destruction that military forces have are less likely to become entangled in wars over less than truly monumental issues. But they will fight when it's necessary, and sometimes having others know that is enough. My daughter once came home from a date in tears. I found out the young lout she was with called her some rather nasty names during an argument they had. I made it my business to have a quiet discussion with him, about the consequences if anything remotely like that happened ever again. OK, so it wasn't a discussion, it was me talking to him, but it was quiet. A few days later he sought me out, apologized, and asked permission to date my daughter again. As he left, he turned around and said, "You know, when you were talking about me calling your daughter names, you were real quiet, but you got this look in your eyes .... it was real intense, actually kind of scary." I told him I was glad he got the message.

 

peace

 

yes i,ll second that

 

Well, I'll third it, then.

 

I'll fourth it...and damn sorry I started this thread...

 

Naaah, no blame to you, Bergalia, this was a good thread until some idjit highjacked it in post #26!



(Oops ..... that wuz you ....)

I fifth it.

 

Aw chalmc, not to sure about people who have been in the militery running a country, fairly close to martial law. People from the armed forces are trained to deal with an issue by one means.

I believe the only way to run a country is democratically, not the crap called democracy that Ozz shares with America and UK but one where no major decisions are made without a referendum.

I believe Switzerland runs this way.

I don't believe that Iraq would have been invaded if it was decided on a referendum.

Sure in years gone by politicians had to make decisions on behalf of the nation as the population wouild have been ill informed on a lot of international issues.

Now, international news is broadcast instantly and I can remember as a kid watching the "Movietone News" at the theatre where the news was a month or two old.

Well that's me bit.

Poida

 

I'm with you 100 percent as far as Australia is concerned Poida. Too many decision against the public interest have been rushed through - hoping that through 'custom and practice' the voters will accept them.
But I suggest a referendum should apply only to matters which affect the nation's security, health and welfare. To hold a referendum on every proposal, no matter how minor would prove prohibitively expensive.
And on that matter when tax-payers money is shovelled out in multi-million buckets we, the tax-payer shold have the right to demand an itemised bill. And that bill should not be met until the nation is satisfied that it is fair and just. (Au$250m. to advertise Industrial relations laws - and now a further Au$200m. to advertise the 'adjustments' to that law...Hey, come on...who are you kidding) Sorry fellow forumites if this is getting parochial.
Finally when a politician - of any colour or rank is caught deliberately lying (Tampa, Children Overboard, No GST, Weapons of Mass destruction etc etc etc) they be instantly booted out and lose their pension, superan', travel rights and all the perks which politicians have ensured for themselves...) Takes deep breath - and exit left, pursued by a bear...

 

Poida,

I appreciate your thought, and it's shared by many, but our first President, former general George Washington, refused an offer to make him king and warned against the dangers of "foreign entanglements" as he left office after 2 terms. Asked by Congress to command a force for possible intervention against France after its Revolution, he accepted only on the grounds that all efforts be made to negotiate a peaceful solution first. One year later an agreement was signed and the force was disbanded.

Among more recent Presidents; former soldiers Teddy Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Regan ended or never were involved in wars. Eisenhower warned against the influence of the "military-industrial complex". Truman agonized over the atomic bomb decision, finally convinced that without them the war could continue for 2 more years, producing more civilian as well as military casualties, and gave warnings ahead of time to the Japanese. Korea and the 1st Gulf War (Truman and 1st Pres. Bush) were the result of requests for military help by nations under invasion (South Korea and Kuwait), with strong UN support. Whatever his faults, Nixon began the process of ending the Vietnam conflict. The notable exception was LBJ.

The only recent US presidents without active duty military service have been Clinton and the current president.

Overall, I stand by my statement that former soldiers tend to know the real consequences of using military force on a large scale and look for every possible alternative first. The one adviser to President Bush who repeatedly recommended waiting and warned of the probable breakdown of society in Iraq if the US invaded was Secretary of State Colin Powell, the only former soldier in the Cabinet. It is often those who do not understand that war is more than scenes on TV who go into it too easily.

As far as pure democracy goes; it seems to work only in small countries with homogeneous populations. Also, I'm not convinced a referendum in Germany in 1939 wouldn't have produced the same result.

Just my opinion.

 

Bergalia,

Your examples of accountability issues may be parochial, but the principle is universal. I'd like to see more referendum votes on major cost programs (of course, in this country these days, you have to be careful to how you define "major". Everett Dirkson, a wise leader in our Senate in the last century once said, "a billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about serious money." ).

Don't look too soon for laws taking away the perks of politicians caught lying .... 'twould mean the halls of government would be empty and they'd all be forced to look for real jobs!

 

On reflection Charley that's true...and would only boost the unemployment rolls...

And I have to agree with your sumation of the virtues of ex-military men/women in prime offices. They are, without doubt the only ones who from experience have learned the futility and waste in using armed force.

Finally (suck suck) loved your most recent 'Where is this'. Hand on heart I did 'toy' with Berlin, then rejected. "Just too obvious..even an American wouldn't be that naive...."

 

It was the old "double fake" !

On the subject of politicians and honesty: I lived in Berlin, moved around East Germany when I was in the Army long ago. One day I visited a shop selling beautiful crystal in the Eastern Sector. Chatting with the owner, I asked her how it was possible to have such a shop in the "poster city" of Communisim. She laughed and said, "Nothing changes for us. My ancestors paid off the churchmen, then the Kaisers, then the Weimar beauraucrats, then the Nazis, and now we pay off the Communists."

 

was.nt that peanut farmer bloke, a submarine commander? a qualified nuclear guy
And seeing as USA has been involved in 28 wars since ww2 how can all those presidents be clean, sure they were not declared wars but they were wars
Tell me this, is it big oil that keeps Bush from been put on trial as a war criminal? nobody disputes the war was illegal, so whats stoppong the mechanisms? from lynching this bloke
Tke our bloke, he lies and cheats and goes to church on a Sunday, yet the people as k him back
Why? cos he panders to their wishes, closes doors to many, racist, which suits Aussies, Did you know it was not until 1956 that other than whites could emmigrate here .finally I think we are a;; sick of his lies, he mau go, but dont bet on it he does not have the power of veto like your guy, I,O to much power is vested to one ,over there, and this time its vested to a madman