Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.

---

I just want it cleaned up. Big-time.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Don't worry too much Chris as all that you desire will happen soon enough. This Democrat-led Govt. will be thrown out of office next year when they lose both houses of Congress in historic fashion. The only down side for you unfortunately, is that there likely will NOT be room at the table for your Taliban pals. You did say the other day they deserved a seat in the Afghan Govt. didn't you? And who could argue with that bit of wisdom, right Chris? You've missed the beheadings, whippings, rapes, stonings, acid-in-the-face attacks on schoolgirls haven't you? You want to see all that brought back, right Chrisisalltaliban?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think the argument for letting the Taliban participate in elections is that 1) it gives some legitimacy to the government, a message that reinforces that we're there to help the people of Afghanistan choose who they want to rule them even if it's people we disagree with, and 2) when the Taliban gets absolutely NO votes, we get to laugh at them because they just hung themselves with the rope we offered them. Mwahaha.

---

Yuppers. Of course, it will help if they actually DO get no votes, and if it happened in a "clean" election. We apparently don't trust ourselves or our efforts there enough to take that chance. After all, what if the election DIDN'T go our way? (I'm lookin' at YOU, Hamas!)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

---

An insurgency cannot exist without at least some base level support from the people...

At the rate the insurgency has grown over the past five years, I think that suggest both major dis satisfaction with the present regime ( particular with the election fiasco ) as well as the foreign troops propping that government up ( random airstrikes and drone attacks cannot help )

At this point, if a free election were possible, the Taliban would probably win quite a few protest votes, as Obama won many anybody but the asshole republican votes...

Maybe even win, but the point is lost as we would never see a real free vote anyway...



Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists


Lets party like its 1939

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Refresh my memory - wasn't it Reagan who supported, armed, and trained the people who became the Taliban and Al Qaeda? Seems you Republicans have more of a love affair with them than anyone else does.

---

Quote:

---

"Regret what? That secret operation (the CIA backing of Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists) was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"
-Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur, Jan, 1998

"I've learned an immense amount from Dr. Brzezinski."
-Hussein Obama, 12 Sept 2007
youtube.com/watch?v=ASlETEx0T-I

"I endorsed Obama."
-Zbigniew Brzezinski, MSNBC
youtube.com/watch?v=NCO7Pr7RJ7s

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

When say a car company decides to build 300 top end SUVs instead of 3000 base models because the profit margins are higher on the SUVs... and lay off 800 workers in the process... is that really to the benefit of people ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Gino: yeah, also probable. It's kind of too bad that a few years ago, maybe when we first went in, we didn't let the Taliban "compete" in an election when they were extremely unpopular.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

When say a car company decides to build 300 top end SUVs instead of 3000 base models because the profit margins are higher on the SUVs... and lay off 800 workers in the process... is that really to the benefit of people ?

---

It freaks me out that Govt Motors still refuses to advertise its Cavalier base model. The smallest car it advertises is the competitor of Honda Accord. Never mind that Honda Civic is the king of the hill in sales. GM runs ads with its entire product line, sans Cavalier, bragging about their gas milage, when Cavalier gets the best mileage for GM.

This decision is made at Bohemian Grove, Bilderburger and CFR, not at GM, to subvert USA for the NWO.

My engineering professors told our class that in 10 years, there would be no more engineering jobs in USA. That was 9 years ago.

Commie China at Billary Clinton Blythe Rockefeller White House: Amerika Destroyed by Design
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4167926428522965274#]

---

Funny enough I think the direct historical comparison would be 1930's Germany

" In the early 1930s German auto industry was still largely composed of luxury models, and the average German rarely could afford something more than a motorcycle. Seeking a potential new market, some auto industries begun independent projects of a "Volks Auto" (people's automobile) - Mercedes' 170H, Adler's AutoBahn, Steyr 55, Hanomag 1,3L, among others. The trend was not new, as Béla Barényi is credited with having conceived the basic design in the middle 1920's. Joseph Ganz developed the Standard Superior (going as far as advertising it as the "German Volkswagen").[2] Also, in Czechoslovakia, the Hans Ledwinka's penned Tatra 77, a very popular car amongst the German elite, was becoming smaller and more affordable at each revision. In 1933, with many of the above projects still in development or early stages of production, Adolf Hitler declared his intentions for a state-sponsored "Volkswagen" program. Hitler required a basic vehicle capable of transporting two adults and three children at 100 km/h (62 mph). The "People's Car" would be available to citizens of the Third Reich through a savings scheme at 990 Reichsmark, about the price of a small motorcycle (an average income being around 32RM a week).[3]

Despite heavy lobbing in favor of one of the existing projects, Hitler choose to sponsor an all new, state owned factory. The engineer chosen for the task was Ferdinand Porsche. By then an already famed engineer, Porsche was the designer of the Mercedes 170H, and worked at Steyr for quite some time in the late 1920s. When he opened his own design studio he landed two separate "Auto für Jedermann" (car for everybody) projects with NSU and Zündapp, both motorcycle manufacturers. Neither project come to fruition, stalling at prototype phase, but the basic concept remained in Porsche's mind time enough, so on 22 June 1934, Dr. Ferdinand Porsche agreed to create the "People's Car" for Hitler.

Changes included better fuel efficiency, reliability, ease of use, and economically efficient repairs and parts. The intention was that ordinary Europeans would buy the car by means of a savings scheme ("Fünf Mark die Woche musst Du sparen, willst Du im eigenen Wagen fahren" — "Save five Marks a week, if you want to drive your own car"), which around 336,000 people eventually paid into. Volkswagen honoured its savings agreements in West Germany (but not in East Germany) after World War II[citation needed]. Prototypes of the car called the "KdF-Wagen" (German: Kraft durch Freude — "strength through joy"), appeared from 1936 onwards (the first cars had been produced in Stuttgart). The car already had its distinctive round shape and air-cooled, flat-four, rear-mounted engine. The VW car was just one of many KdF programmes which included things such as tours and outings. The prefix Volks— ("People's") was not just applied to cars, but also to other products in Europe; the "Volksempfänger" radio receiver for instance. On 28 May 1937, the Gesellschaft zur Vorbereitung des Deutschen Volkswagens mbH was established by the Deutsche Arbeitsfront. It was later renamed "Volkswagenwerk GmbH" on 16 September 1938. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen




Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists


Lets party like its 1939

Quote:

---

It freaks me out that Govt Motors still refuses to advertise its Cavalier base model. The smallest car it advertises is the competitor of Honda Accord. Never mind that Honda Civic is the king of the hill in sales. GM runs ads with its entire product line, sans Cavalier, bragging about their gas milage, when Cavalier gets the best mileage for GM.

---

Quote:

---

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.

---

I'm tempted to say "Fuck you and your little dog too, DT", but seeing as I've sworn off snark I'll refrain. Besides, I like little dogs.

...IMHO all workplaces and all governmental functions should be controlled as cooperatives, with no "chair" or "CEO" positions created.

---

Quote:

---

I don't think you understand how a parliamentary system is supposed to work.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Gino: Bah, Parliaments are Republics just as much as America's congress is. Technically in both the executive branch is SUPPOSED to answer to the legislative branch which is SUPPOSED to answer to the people... They don't.

However, you're right about the problem of the minority vote and exclusion. It's a hard problem to answer for. In the best world, The majority would state what they want, the minority would troubleshoot, and some effort would be made to either address the concerns or compromise.

---

Quote:

---

Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

---

Quote:

---

direct democracy in which the public can override government on issues and force deciding referendums.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:

Gino: Bah, Parliaments are Republics just as much as America's congress is. Technically in both the executive branch is SUPPOSED to answer to the legislative branch which is SUPPOSED to answer to the people... They don't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
O2B
Anger has rendered you incomprehensible.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:

Quote:

---

Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

---

Ah, you were speaking about Karzai. I think the main problem here is corruption, and I've also heard that some of the vote smudging here is actually a common practice in the Middle East.

Now, I want to be clear: that doesn't make it RIGHT.

But the system us Americans set up in Afghanistan, we set up with the assumption that the people of Afghanistan think the same way Americans do, and behave the same way, same practices and etc., and MORE importantly, we expected the Afghanistan leadership to have the same skill in hiding their transgression as do US politicians. Well, why would the Afghani leadership have needed to? They just have to get into power and then the position is theirs in subsequent elections simply by might makes right. We see this in a number of Middle Eastern leaders, it's by no means an uncommon perspective or tactic regionally.

Heck, voter fraud is practically inevitable WHEREVER you have an election.

The 2005 Afghanistan parliament is fortunately more diverse, so hopefully they'll represent some resistance to Karzai, but only if America stops meddling.

And once again, in the American system, the judicial and legislative are supposed to check the presidential power (and this is also present in the Afghanistan system), unfortunately many of those checks on the executive branch were given up a long time ago.

Quote:

---

direct democracy in which the public can override government on issues and force deciding referendums.

---

I like this, but why have the representatives in the first place? If you care enough about an issue, call a town meeting, but otherwise giving people the job of writing laws just means they write themselves crap they can make money off of or or write themselves loopholes. The longer a system of law persists and is added to, the more of a bureaucratic nightmare it becomes.

---

Quote:

---

This is a similar position to the position of Israel: Hamas is pretty dead set on a Palestinian State, but willing to recognizing Israel in exchange. By contrast, Islamic Jihad would stop at nothing to see Israel destroyed, IIRC. So logically, Israel would oppose Islamic Jihad more, right? Well, then there's the matter of pratical reality: There's a lot of support for Hamas, and they might succeed, and Israel really doesn't want that. Islamic Jihad is far more Pie in the Sky and will never ever get what it wants. So regardless of intentions, Hamas is a far greater threat, which is why Israel was blaming Hamas for everything even before they came to power: Because they knew they were a threat.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

This is a similar position to the position of Israel: Hamas is pretty dead set on a Palestinian State, but willing to recognizing Israel in exchange.

---

I notice we tend to blame an awful lot of stuff on "Al Qaeda In Iraq", too, which is ironic, since there never was such an entity until AFTER we invaded Iraq in an effort to "stabilize" it. :) Now it seems AQI are just EVERYWHERE over there. So one has to conclude one of two things: Either we're exaggerating their presence (making shit up, go figure), or we've given them the best recruiting tool since Pearl Harbor.

---

Quote:

---

"'Al-Qaida', literally "THE DATABASE", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the (Jewish/Atheist Communist) Russians."
-Robin Cook, London Guardian, "Former Blair Minister Points Out Al-Qaeda CIA Ties," July 9, 2005 (assassinated while walking)

"'Al Qaeda' is NOT an organization. Al Qaeda is a way of working ... but this has the hallmark of that approach."
-Queen Tony BLiar, Fox News, "Cops: London Attacks Were Homicide Blasts," July 15, 2005

Terrorism.
The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized;
a mode of government by terror or intimidation.
-Webster Dictionary, 1913

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:

Quote:

---

Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

---

Ah, you were speaking about Karzai. I think the main problem here is corruption, and I've also heard that some of the vote smudging here is actually a common practice in the Middle East.

Now, I want to be clear: that doesn't make it RIGHT.

But the system us Americans set up in Afghanistan...

---

---

Quote:

---

Pirate News:
Neither branch actually reads nor writes the laws they pass, nor could they understand the law if they tried to read it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Quote:

---

Pirate News:
Neither branch actually reads nor writes the laws they pass, nor could they understand the law if they tried to read it.

---

John, you really nailed it on the head. I'd go so far as to say that they are actively selected for that inability.

---