Not that I've seen. So far your idea of "discussion" seems to consist of throwing insults at the objects of your hatred.

When did you discuss anything? You only hurled venom.

Well, I may be the only marxist on subsim but I don't care. I wanted to get a message across and now that I have, I'm done. No more political/idealogical talk from me, look for my next post on my little adventure with U-47 on my campaign :salute::salute::salute:

Check out CCIP. He's been a valuable member here for many years, believes in Communism and has actually been know to discuss it intelligently, without ever going on a tirade about the "evil US" or anything else.

Sorry, but the only point you got across is that you're biased, hateful, and so convinced you're right that your discussion is limited to invective.

Now that I've done my tirade, I'll say please do continue political dialogue. If you actually have something to say, it is quite welcome, as long as it's actual discussion. :sunny:

Haha, now, I've been eyeing this thread cautiously to avoid getting involved. It never ends well :dead:

I'm a little surprised this has turned to Russia-bashing as much as socialist bashing. Can we please not see the world as black and white - or red-and-white for that matter? With hidnsight, it's easy to slam down things quickly. Without baggage of Eurasian history (that America gleefully claims to be no party to), it's easy to come out with 'objective' prove how as a nation, the US stands on higher moral ground, whether in Iraq or WWII. But real history as it happens is never that simple. With regard to the USSR/Russia's role in European history, just as with the US's role in Iraqi history, you can't just outright dismiss it as universally good or bad. And in the end, I think both were misguided by principles and have to own up to mistakes that cost real human lives. People, believe it or not, are much the same everywhere. And a human tragedy isn't any less of a tragedy whether it happens to a Russian, American, Arab, or any other victim of terror - be it by state or individual, and be it on the scale of one or millions. The Iraq War, no matter how you slice it, was a tremendous social, moral and political EVIL. Could it have been a necessary one? Maybe. But for crying out loud, as an American, you elected many of the officials who got it rolling (or permitted them to be elected, or didn't sufficiently object after they were elected). OWN UP TO IT, recognize that you don't live in a state run by angels, that your political choices can be wrong, and you don't fart blessings and moral glory spontaneously and without pause. If you're going to slam down Russians or Arabs as morally-detestable-based-on-history, don't forget that get that log out of your own eye. That holier-than-thou attitude and willingness to blame other people, and not the politics and military reality of the war, is what always pisses me off in this debate.

As far as my own stance, Steve isn't totally correct on my views. I'm not a communist and I don't really believe in scientific socialism as per Marx because many of its underlying assumptions are flat out WRONG, and at best are based in a very idealized world. But that doesn't mean we can't learn from it. And I do genuinely believe that the solution to the world's ills lies in everyone coming together and making pragmatic but mutual compromises, NOT pulling everything to themselves because they feel entitled to what they "earn", without considering what the real price of things is or who might've "owned" it in the first place. I guess that makes me a dangerous socialist by some people's estimations. All the same, I have great respect for the Western ideal of the thinking, moral individual who can make his/her own responsible choices and exist on equal respect with others without anyone telling him/her to. Which is why I really only pitch into politically-neutral or non-political discussions in GT anymore. I hate being slammed for something I don't even believe in but am forced to defend (because I think it's a view has learning-value even despite its flaws), and I hate having to lose respect for other people that in all other situations (even on this forum) I can and do totally get along with.

You are absolutely right, and I have stated the fallacy of the Iraq war. I also agree about the holier-than-thou attitude. However, when you join the conversation by stating that America is an imperialist nation of terrorists, none of which is true, and then proceed to throw around terms like 'imperialist' and 'communist' without any real understanding of what those terms mean, you can't expect to be taken seriously. You never do those things, but my responses in this thread were directed to someone who did.

To clarify, imperialist nations exact political and economic control over their satellite states, much like the British Empire, or the Warsaw Pact nations. The United States' overseas military installations are not, therefore, a form of imperialism. Neither is the occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. Those nations remain autonomous, both politically and economically. No such taxes are extracted from those nations; nor are they from Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia or any other nation hosting a US military installation. I do find this type of meddling distasteful, and I do not approve of it, but imperialism it is not.

Communism is the process of replacing private ownership and profit-based economies with public ownership and communal control of industry and economic structures. No nation in the history of man has ever had a communal system of ownership. The Soviet Union, for example, had a system of state ownership, where the economic and industrial sector were owned and controlled by the government, not the people. Specifically, the Soviet Union was socialist oligarchy, where the powers of the state were held by a select few. The People's Republic of China continues to refer to itself as a socialist state, not a communist state.

Umm, Socialism and Russia didn't come into play until August's comment in post #88, and that was a direct, and well-deserved, reply to post #84. No one would have gone there if not for the accusation that the US and Israel are "the real terrorists".

I completely agree. No nation, or people, should ever try to sweep their own culpability under the rug. Stalin's atrocities were Stalin's, not Russia's or "Communism's". The Nazis atrocities were done by individuals, not the nation or even the Party. Americans, British, and others have committed evil in the belief that they were doing good. But again, August and I didn't start that sideshow, we responded to an attack.

I completely agree.

I have reservations on that judgement. I believe that to be an opinion, arguably correct but still an opinion.

I separated my response to this because while I don't necessarily think it was EVIL, I also don't believe it was necessary or warranted. I thought from the start it was a huge mistake, and a lot of people have paid for it.

:rotfl2: I love it!

And you're right. We have quite a few here, like myself, who try to look at things from an unbiased viewpoint, and we have a few who will insist that somebody else is the cause of all problems, and must be blamed at any cost. As far as the government - especially mine - being "of the people", and we being responsible for its actions, I said as much in another post.

Again I agree without reservation. But again, in this particular case both August, Tak and I responded to just the opposite, an attack on the US, and our response was directed at an accusation from a poster who at the very least implied that the US was far worse than, yes, the Soviet Union in this department, and our responses were directed specifically at that accusation. I think you have this one backwards this time.

I would disagree, Nazi atrocities were a matter of state policy at the highest levels.

I don't see how it wasn't an evil.

Any time you invade a country on false pretenses and kill its people I would say its a pretty unwarranted and aggressive invasion. The only reason we got away with it is that were america and nobody wanted to condemn us, and also partly because iraq isn't a popular country.

Dude honestly. If you want folks to start taking you seriously then quit mixing up "false pretenses" and "bad information". They are just not the same thing.

A no time did the US government not consider Saddam to be a viable threat.

I tend to agree. Nazism by nature includes a strong element of racism, and Nazi ideologcy does not do anything less that turning sadism and inhumane barbarism based on racial arguments into a collective and mandatory moral obligation of the community - the community and not the individual, because Nazism is a totalitarian ideology, and by defintion totalitarianism means the community overrules the individual interest, although both are under total control by the "elite" at the top, or the leader at the top. The individual'S behavior is demanded to melt into the behavior of the collective, the one is demanded to become indistinguishable from the many, in his thinking and opinion, in his motiavtion, in his craving and yearning for goals, in his deeds and acts. Uniformity, in other words.

Ha ha seriously? you think all the "evidence" we had was actually believed by anyone other than the american public? The CIA was being told to give information that backed up what the bush administration "knew". I mean they showed us artists conceptions and acted like it was fact.

False pretenses fits the bill, when the sources of "bad information" stand up in public and humiliates the US presentation of that information and the US carries on selling that information as evidence then that is unquesionably going on false pretenses.
If so much of the "bad information" hadn't been so widely exposed as tripe well before the invasion then august may have a point, but as it had he hasn't.

Puting all the political and tactical strategic stuff aside.....

Don't you agree that Sadam was evil?
US wanted to get rid of Saddam and install some kind of normative friendly government.
Its simply did not work as expected.
If it did Iraq could have been what Egypt just might be for middle east.
Many Iraqis wanted this to happen but they are tired by now.
The stategy of kiling civilians and linking it to US presence worked well.
No much effort was needed for that since in Saddam time it mostly happened to Kurds and to ones with whom Saddam was unhappy with.
Stalin style.
As long as you kept your mouth shut and thought the right thing you might be OK.
The ocationaly killing of inocet peaple while fighting the terrorist just contributed to the mess.
Now add to this all kind of events of atrocities in line of duty amplified by Arab and Western media.
Its hard to avoid them when keeping such a big military force in hostile territory for so long.
And i don't think it was endorsed by US army.


Road to hell is paved by good intentions or politics.

You mean the same information that the Clinton administration also believed?

Dude I know you're partisan minded but the truth of the matter is the Administration was going by what they believed to be true.