quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
They don't want real, actual socialism. (State ownership of the means of production, etc.) They want more welfare and public benefits....

They want their ticket on the public gravy train, which, in reality, enslaves them to those who write the checks, which is the goal of liberal politicians. Under the guise of serving the people, they will subjugate the people.

Funny that they didn't seem to have a better handle on the details of Socialism. Usually people talking with an upspeak inflection and using "like" a couple of times per sentence are pretty knowledgeable and on top of their game...even though they sound stupid.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
They are ignoramuses.

I believe the plural of 'ignoramus' is 'origami'.

quote:

Perhaps not basket weaving, but CEOs of corporations, Governors of states, and key roles within the Government. Also members of the media. That's why this is scary. Otherwise, I wouldn't care :-)

Thank goodness I'm 56 and won't see much of the inescapable, looming clusterfuck.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
They are ignoramuses.

I believe the plural of 'ignoramus' is 'origami'.

LOL!

Their minds are bent

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
They don't want real, actual socialism. (State ownership of the means of production, etc.) They want more welfare and public benefits.

They are ignoramuses.

In theory, "sharing" everything sounds wonderful...
In practice, it removes all incentives to excel and ultimately ruins a society.
"More welfare and public benefits" sounds great... if you can always find some other sucker to pay for them.

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
― Margaret Thatcher

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
"It should be noted, implementation of this theory has NEVER worked and always results in the populous suffering."

"populace".

"Populous" is an adjective meaning having a large population; "populace" is a noun denoting the people of that population.

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by nighthawk:
There was a guy that called Rush last month that said the US attacked Japan unprovoked during WWII. He had no idea what happened at PearlHarbor, or what it was. He was a college graduate, not that it means much today, the lack of knowledge they have is staggering.

In a sense, he may be right. The USS Ward fired on and sank a Japanese midget submarine outside of Pearl Harbor before the attack there. Technically, we were not yet at war with Japan when that happened, but the island forces had been put on high alert.

flashguy

He knew nothing of Pearl Harbor, never heard of it, he wasn’t technically right, he was ignorant of all of it.

Why am i not surprised?

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by nighthawk:
There was a guy that called Rush last month that said the US attacked Japan unprovoked during WWII.

In a sense, he may be right. The USS Ward fired on and sank a Japanese midget submarine outside of Pearl Harbor before the attack there. Technically, we were not yet at war with Japan when that happened, but the island forces had been put on high alert.

Interesting question that I’d never seen raised before.

I don’t recall the specifics of the Ward action, but I always assumed it occurred inside the harbor, or at least well within US territorial waters. If so, then a warship of a foreign power that we had tense relations with and were specifically on alert against entered our territory in a stealthy manner clearly intended to avoid detection, I would argue that firing on such a craft was hardly unprovoked. What would be the appropriate response by US forces have been if a platoon of fully-armed Japanese marines had landed on Wake Island and attempted to approach an outpost under cover of darkness? “Oh, hey, guys; what’s going on? Did you come for the BBQ this afternoon?”

In fact, I would argue that the war didn’t start when the first Japanese warplane crossed into US airspace, but when the submarine invaded our territorial waters on an obvious combat mission.
(Added: According to Wiki, the submarine was sunk outside Pearl Harbor, but in American waters.)

How about on a personal level? I have an argument with my neighbor about his incessantly barking dog. He makes a vague threat of the “You’d better be careful” sort, goes into his house, comes out with a shotgun, walks into my yard, and then points the gun at me. Do I have a right to defend myself at that point, or do I need to wait until he fires the first shot?

And as one last comment about the French forces that opposed the invasion of their territory in North Africa, they were not in direct support of German forces. If a non-German joined the Waffen SS (as many men from various countries did), then I wouldn’t say that that person was a member of his native country’s armed forces. He would have been a soldier in the German army. Vichy France, however, was an independent country at the time of the North African invasion, and the commanders who refused to surrender when the US and UK forces invaded their territory were fighting on behalf of their country: France. And France didn’t stop being France because part of the country was occupied any more than Germany stopped being Germany when it was occupied by the Four Powers or because it lost territory to Poland after WWII.

For a very good book about the North African operation, to include all the political maneuvering, I recommend the first in the “Liberation Trilogy” by Rick Atkinson, An Army at Dawn.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

quote:

Originally posted by ersatzknarf:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
They are ignoramuses.

I believe the plural of 'ignoramus' is 'origami'.

LOL!

Their minds are bent

If you wiggle their tail, their ears flap.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
"To be quite honest, I don't know"

Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. Typical

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YMxTEZ7JizI" width="420"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

How can you support something you neither understand nor can explain?

The quote which comes to mind is

"there's no sense in being stupid if you can't prove it".

quote:

Originally posted by SIG 229R:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
"To be quite honest, I don't know"

Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. Typical

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YMxTEZ7JizI" width="420"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

How can you support something you neither understand nor can explain?

Simple, you listen to your school teachers and college profs, and merely parrot what they tell you.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:...How about on a personal level? I have an argument with my neighbor about his incessantly barking dog. He makes a vague threat of the “You’d better be careful” sort, goes into his house, comes out with a shotgun, walks into my yard, and then points the gun at me. Do I have a right to defend myself at that point, or do I need to wait until he fires the first shot? ...

Excellent, and relevant point. I might also note that the Japanese planes were already in flight to attack Pearl Harbor before the USS Ward sank the sub. Pearl Harbor would have been attacked regardless of the Ward. The fact that the sub was hit before Pearl was hit is irrelevant.

Why can't all those that want Socialism live in Socialist countries?

Of course they don't know what it means economically, they have been raised by idiots, educated by idiots and chose to remain idiots. That makes them iCubed

quote:

Originally posted by SIGSense:
Why can't all those that want Socialism live in Socialist countries?

Because the Socialists have already ruined all of them...