Has America become an oligarchy?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by JU_88

I am as much to blame, dont worry about it - you know I love you really

Just keep it platonic.

Originally Posted by Skybird

I was frustrated , and you were so angry that you said you would ignore me in the future.

Only because of the names you called me, and that when I was agreeing with you in principle if not in specifics. I was never angry about the argument itself. I just don't do that. I do, however, say things in a manner that provokes the other guy, for which I will always apologize, since I can't seem to help doing it.

[Skybird]

Naturally, back then I saw that very differently than you say now.



Maybe we should analyse it again, this time thoroughly and in depth.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Naturally, back then I saw that very differently than you say now.



Maybe we should analyse it again, this time thoroughly and in depth.

If we can stay away from the fireworks, I would be honored.

[Skybird]

1-2 hours of researching the forum software and collecting records on when who said what and where, in reference to what posting earlier, which was a reply to something before that, claiming contexts the other denied or forgot or rejected, and this over several different discussion threads on the same principle issue, with many diverting sub-discussions on micromanaged sub-level details in...

[intervention mode on]
*** FULL STOP ... WARNING ... SELF-DESTRUCTION IS IMMINENT ***
[intervention mode off]


As long as one cannot get an academic grade for that, I think I pass on it. Using SPSS for the statistics part of my diploma study was easier.

[soopaman2]

Is America is Oligarchy?

The real question is how long has it been one?

Trickle down economics era (St. Ronald), or even longer? I say longer.

I believe we have been one since WW2, when the airplane and munitions factories saw how profitable war was.

America just seems to get into less and less noble wars since then.
Korea was a proxy war between us and the USSR.

Vietnam was as well ultimatly, we tried to help the French, and they ran away and left us with a bucket of feces that killed 60,000 men, and had many more brave survivors spit on by people like Jane Fonda.

First desert storm was the only real noble one (or was it?), and if that was some garbage pit in Malacca we would not have cared... But the OIL!

Last 2? Iraq, Afghanistan?
Sorry, utter bullcrap, people got rich but the American people lost.
(I lost alot in these 2)

Military Industrial Complex... Ask Ike.

How about the prison industry? Filthy potheads in prison with killers and arsonists, and getting heavier sentences in some cases..

Thats another thread..

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Vietnam was as well ultimatly, we tried to help the French, and they ran away and left us with a bucket of feces that killed 60,000 men, and had many more brave survivors spit on by people like Jane Fonda.

I can't agree or disagree with some of the others, but Vietnam was nothing like that at all.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Vietnam was as well ultimatly, we tried to help the French, and they ran away and left us with a bucket of feces that killed 60,000 men, and had many more brave survivors spit on by people like Jane Fonda.

You came to the help of the French in Indochine? That is the most absurd and most distorted explanation for the American Vietnam war I have ever heared.

As a matter of fact the French unerestimated the capability of the Vietnamese, got shreddered, and when trying to let America know of their experiences and how to not make their mistakes, Washington did not want to listen to their hard-learned lessons.

You came after the French, yes. But not to help them. Leave it to saying that you just went there, for some idiotic reason and after staging an incident.

There are only wars of needs and wars of choice and desire. Vietnam was one of the latter, like most of America's wars since WWII.

Desert Storm also could be debated, considering how Wshington allowed it to end and how the American ambassador send mixed signals to Saddam before he went into Kuwait, and that Saddam was Washington's pet they still continued to allow a long line after Desert Storm, when he cracked down on the Shia that trusted in Washington'S promise to assist them. As we know by now, that trust was a very bad mistake.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You came to the help of the French in Indochine? That is the most absurd and most distorted explanation for the American Vietnam war I have ever heared.

As a matter of fact the French unerestimated the capability of the Vietnamese, got shreddered, and when trying to let America know of their experiences and how to not make their mistakes, Washington did not want to listen to their hard-learned lessons.

You came after the French, yes. But not to help them. Leave it to saying that you just went there, for some idiotic reason and after staging an incident.

There are only wars of needs and wars of choice and desire. Vietnam was one of the latter, like most of America's wars since WWII.

Desert Storm also could be debated, considering how Wshington allowed it to end and how the American ambassador send mixed signals to Saddam before he went into Kuwait, and that Saddam was Washington's pet they still continued to allow a long line after Desert Storm, when he cracked down on the Shia that trusted in Washington'S promise to assist them. As we know by now, that trust was a very bad mistake.

Yes all bullcrap. We agree on one thing. Proxy war on communism is what I believe. Others see different, but unless you or me are one of the initiators we will never know, all we know is that someone got wealthy from it, which was my point of the whole thing...

I tend to look at the big picture, poor men died, while rich men prospered.

The Foreigion Legionaires were done in it at Dien Bien Phu in 1954.
The U.S. involvement came later for the greatest extent.

It was two different Wars for the outsiders.
It was just another day at War for the population.

[SubV]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Is America is Oligarchy?

The real question is how long has it been one?

Certainly it is. Democracy is just the facade.

How long? I think, almost from the beginning.

[the_tyrant]

let me change Steve's quote a bit:
"'Society' has no rights. 'The Majority' has no rights. 'The Minority' has no rights. 'Humans' have no rights. No group has rights. Only money has rights."

I remember clearly the first chapter in my Chinese political science text book:

Capitalist society is built on oppression. It can either be people in the country who are oppressed (traditional capitalism), people overseas who are oppressed (outsourcing), or simple a nation and its riches are pillaged and raped (imperialism and colonialism)


Frankly, in my opinion, communism is the same thing, just that they spew propaganda at you insisting that "the oppressors are no more!"

I have an online buddy, from Albania. He is a supporter of capitalism and class division. This is what he tells me:
"Under communism, we were pretty much classless, in which we were all poor. With capitalism, at least I am rich, most others are still poor though."

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

l
I have an online buddy, from Albania. He is a supporter of capitalism and class division. This is what he tells me:
"Under communism, we were pretty much classless, in which we were all poor. With capitalism, at least I am rich, most others are still poor though."

Yeah, capitalism works pretty good when you are the rich one.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

Frankly, in my opinion, communism is the same thing, just that they spew propaganda at you insisting that "the oppressors are no more!"

I have an online buddy, from Albania. He is a supporter of capitalism and class division. This is what he tells me:
"Under communism, we were pretty much classless, in which we were all poor. With capitalism, at least I am rich, most others are still poor though."

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...6&postcount=20