Tenshi 0 #26 March 21, 2006 Oh ok. Well we'll just wait for them to use it then. Hopefully they'll bomb the USA or Israel and not Brussels. On second thought...better make it the US. Israel is a bit too close and I wouldn't want the salad in my garden to go radioactive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,435 #27 March 21, 2006 >Well we'll just wait for them to use it then. Are you talking about your neighbor's gun or a country's nuclear weapons here? >Hopefully they'll bomb the USA or Israel and not Brussels. I think we are at greater risk from countries who a) have nuclear weapons, b) have said they will destroy us and c) have ballistic missiles. If you want a place to concentrate your efforts, such places would be a better starting point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tenshi 0 #28 March 21, 2006 QuoteWell we'll just wait for them to use it then. Are you talking about your neighbor's gun or a country's nuclear weapons here? Hollow comparisons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,435 #29 March 21, 2006 >Hollow comparisons. You were the one who started with . . . . Never mind. You're right. Whatever your point is, you're right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tenshi 0 #30 March 21, 2006 SCORE! What was my point again? Oh yes...something about bombing for virginity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #31 March 21, 2006 QuoteI'm sorry to say but you are babbling off topic. QuoteDo what ya, want, just that trying to prevent ownership is pathetic planning. Would you prohibit your kids from having drugs and think they'll never do em? Course not, you try ot educate them and hope they do the right thing. Iran is not my son. QuoteFinally, when we bombed Hiroshima, we did so with the planning that we didn't conventionally bomb Hiroshima at all. We did this so we could see the actual deaths and damage to an unmolested, undisturbed city; is this responsible handling of an atomic weapon? Who says we are so responsible? Us......... I never said the USA is responsible. The bombing of Japan is the most inhumane act of war (make that TERRORISM) in the history of man kind. That includes the Holocaust. But it has nothing to do with Iran now has it? QuoteIran is not my son. We treat weaker countries as our kids, so I think it's fair to draw that analogy. QuoteI never said the USA is responsible. The bombing of Japan is the most inhumane act of war (make that TERRORISM) in the history of man kind. That includes the Holocaust. But it has nothing to do with Iran now has it? If the US isn't responsible then how can we dictate to other countries and expect respect from others and ourselves? Not the most inhumane, approx 70k killed in Hiroshima, as I recall, and less with Nagasaki since it was impromptu. 6 million in the holocaust and a reported 6 million American Indians by the settlers/early Americans. But we used Hiroshima as a petri dish, as opposed to bombing Tokyo where there may have been some war manufacturing or other military targets. We intentionally hit an unmolested city so we could see the damage - the war had been won, just the punctuation was left. Then after WWII we went to the Bikini Islands, Kwajalene and others and performed Atomic and/or Nuclear testing, which resulted in many cancer deaths and water babies. Point is, we're that hypocritical father who talks of getting drunk and scoring with chicks while condemning our kids for doing the same. Don't wonder why the world thinks we suck. As for having to do with Iran, how can we preach Nuclear responsibility when we started it? We didn't need to use it, but we wanted to see the damage. That's irresponsible and we have no right telling anyone not to have Nukes….. Wonder what Japan thinks of us requiring Iran to drop the nukes? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #32 March 21, 2006 Quote>Iran is not my son. Correct. In this analogy they are someone else's son - so you have even less say over what they do. If they want to do legal drugs, that's OK. If they want to own guns, that's OK too - until they try to use them on you to commit a crime, that is. Good pint, didn't think of that one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #33 March 21, 2006 QuoteOh ok. Well we'll just wait for them to use it then. Hopefully they'll bomb the USA or Israel and not Brussels. On second thought...better make it the US. Israel is a bit too close and I wouldn't want the salad in my garden to go radioactive. I don't think they have ICBM's. The US has taught the world that if you have Nukes you will not be fucked with by the US, kind of positive reinforcement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tenshi 0 #34 March 21, 2006 Yes. You're absolutely right. Still...a precedent has been set in Afghanistan/Iraq. So it's really not a matter of choice. Korea is next...I can't remember if it was the North or the South so I think it best to invade both. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,259 #35 March 21, 2006 QuoteThose folks have been fighting each other since before Christ. Does anyone really think, we can change them? Maybe, form a huge circle around them. Let them fight it out. Last one's standing... throw 'em in jail for being stupid! They don't 'really' want anyone pushing their ideas down their throats. Damned few if, any. Fighting since before Christ, eh? I've seen that posted a few times now, and I've got to say so what? Historically do you honestly think that makes the region any different than any other part of the planet? Think about Europe, the liberal, peaceloving cultural capital of the world. Also the epicentre of the two most devastating wars of the last century. We changed, in the blink of an eye. So tell me again, historically speaking, what makes them so fundamentally different from us?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #36 March 21, 2006 QuoteQuoteThose folks have been fighting each other since before Christ. Does anyone really think, we can change them? Maybe, form a huge circle around them. Let them fight it out. Last one's standing... throw 'em in jail for being stupid! They don't 'really' want anyone pushing their ideas down their throats. Damned few if, any. Fighting since before Christ, eh? I've seen that posted a few times now, and I've got to say so what? Historically do you honestly think that makes the region any different than any other part of the planet? Think about Europe, the liberal, peaceloving cultural capital of the world. Also the epicentre of the two most devastating wars of the last century. We changed, in the blink of an eye. So tell me again, historically speaking, what makes them so fundamentally different from us? Very good point. I would also go farther back than this century with regards to Europe and their culture of violence. - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites warpedskydiver 0 #37 March 21, 2006 when you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? 1. when they come towards you? 2. when they make a fist at their side with lowered hands? 3. when they raise their fists? 4 after they have hit you first? PLEASE TELL ME I AM REALLY WANTING TO KNOW Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #38 March 21, 2006 We changed them in "The blink of an eye?" Not quite! It took years and the loss of thousands of lives of our troops. Not too mention, the tonnage lost in war ships and civilian ships. We must also consider the U.S. with it's history of violence and internal fighting and squabbling. Also the fact that we have had 'internal' terrorism since before our civil war... Ku Klux Klan! What have we done about that??? I think, we haven't cleaned-up our own back yard and we are so concerned with soemone elses!? It's real easy to sit back and comment and argue over what other folks are doing yet, we don't do anything about our own problems, right here. Looks like, every country in this world, has problems. Why, do we feel as though, we are the only one's who can 'fix' every other countries problems? Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,435 #39 March 21, 2006 >when you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? If your neighbor has a gun, do you take it away from him before or after he fires it at you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #40 March 21, 2006 Quote>when you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? If your neighbor has a gun, do you take it away from him before or after he fires it at you? Depends on if he's waving it around threatening to shoot me.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,435 #41 March 21, 2006 >Depends on if he's waving it around threatening to shoot me. And if he doesn't show it to you, just says "stay the fuck off my lawn or you will pay" - when do you take his gun away? Or do you just burn his house down? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tenshi 0 #42 March 21, 2006 Quotewhen you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? 1. when they come towards you? 2. when they make a fist at their side with lowered hands? 3. when they raise their fists? 4 after they have hit you first? PLEASE TELL ME I AM REALLY WANTING TO KNOW If it was my neighbour: 3 In the case of Iran: 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #43 March 21, 2006 QuoteQuotewhen you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? 1. when they come towards you? Depends on how, they come towards you. If, it is in a threatening manner, I'd say it's time to defend yourself. 2. when they make a fist at their side with lowered hands? A fist, down at their side doesn't mean a whole lot. Just be ready. 3. when they raise their fists? They raise their fist in an agressive manner, meaning to do you harm... knock 'em on their ass. 4 after they have hit you first? If, they do hit you first... knock 'em down. They get up... do it again. They'll get the idea. I didn't see where, you mentioned guns or other weapons so, I'm responding in regard to 'fists'. Chuck PLEASE TELL ME I AM REALLY WANTING TO KNOW If it was my neighbour: 3 In the case of Iran: 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hayfield 0 #44 March 21, 2006 Tenshi, your repeated posts are hard to tolerate. Go read some history books and come back after you have! From your comments regarding Hiroshima to your post mentioning the Koreas you have managed to convince me that you are an opionated ass, picking bits of "history" to reinforce your specious reasoning. Much like a Bushite would. Also look up sophistry, terrorism and war while you're at it."Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,435 #45 March 21, 2006 >managed to convince me that you are an opionated ass . . . Let's try to keep away from personal attacks, please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #46 March 21, 2006 tackle the ball .... not the player (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tenshi 0 #47 March 21, 2006 QuoteFrom your comments regarding Hiroshima What did I say about Hiroshima that was wrong? Almost every Jap killed by those bombs was civilian. It was a disgusting warcrime and it has been proven that it was really unnecessary. As for the Korea thing...I was being ironic. Next time I'll add a and a Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Hayfield 0 #48 March 22, 2006 I stand by my ass comment, while I tend to be liberal, I've seen no evidence to the contrary. As for Hiroshima: The bombing of civilian targets (production centers) was a large part of the second world war. It began when GERMANS bombed London and the English retaliated in kind. It was later found (look up Nurmeburg) that strategic bombing of enemy production capacity (this includes the workers) does not constitute a war crime. Additionally, Tokyo was no longer a valid target as it had been mostly burned in a firestorm created by conventional munitions (similar to Dresden) that caused a greater number of civilian casualties. As for the necessity of the bombing: Japan had not capitulated and had rejected the terms of unconditional surrender which was the stated goal of the Allies (same terms for the Germans). Even after 2 nukes, the Japanese still insisted on certain provisions regarding their Emperor's roll in society. Truman agreed in order to stop further bloodshed, Japanese and American alike. The loss of under 200k Japanese (both bombings) civilians is a lot less than there would have been if an invasion of Japan had occurred. And finally, who was gonna invade Japan? Belgium, France, England? No it would have been the US, with Russian backing on the mainland of Asia. How many Russians died crushing the Third Reich? Millions. Unlike Russians, we Americans don't tolerate millions of our own dying. PS The Japanese started the war and commited many warcrimes along the way. Had they not, I certainly think you would have been spared this history lesson. PPS Fox News is the Devil "Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tenshi 0 #49 March 22, 2006 QuoteUnlike Russians, we Americans don't tolerate millions of our own dying. Luckily your president doesn't mind a couple of thousand dying in the desert over a few barrels of oil and a nuclear slingshot huh? Might as well put the pedal to the metal if I'm an ass. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites okalb 79 #50 March 22, 2006 QuoteAnother question I have is: Why, does the rest of the world have to be like 'us' (The U.S.A.)? Seems like, that's what we're trying to do. I think senator J William Fulbright described it best when he said: "Power tends to confuse itself with virtue and a great nation is particularly susceptible to the idea that its power is a sign of God's favor, conferring upon it a special responsibility for other nations — to make them richer and happier and wiser, to remake them, that is, in its own shining image. Power confuses itself with virtue and tends also to take itself for omnipotence. Once imbued with the idea of a mission, a great nation easily assumes that it has the means as well as the duty to do God's work."Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 2,435 #27 March 21, 2006 >Well we'll just wait for them to use it then. Are you talking about your neighbor's gun or a country's nuclear weapons here? >Hopefully they'll bomb the USA or Israel and not Brussels. I think we are at greater risk from countries who a) have nuclear weapons, b) have said they will destroy us and c) have ballistic missiles. If you want a place to concentrate your efforts, such places would be a better starting point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tenshi 0 #28 March 21, 2006 QuoteWell we'll just wait for them to use it then. Are you talking about your neighbor's gun or a country's nuclear weapons here? Hollow comparisons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #29 March 21, 2006 >Hollow comparisons. You were the one who started with . . . . Never mind. You're right. Whatever your point is, you're right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tenshi 0 #30 March 21, 2006 SCORE! What was my point again? Oh yes...something about bombing for virginity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #31 March 21, 2006 QuoteI'm sorry to say but you are babbling off topic. QuoteDo what ya, want, just that trying to prevent ownership is pathetic planning. Would you prohibit your kids from having drugs and think they'll never do em? Course not, you try ot educate them and hope they do the right thing. Iran is not my son. QuoteFinally, when we bombed Hiroshima, we did so with the planning that we didn't conventionally bomb Hiroshima at all. We did this so we could see the actual deaths and damage to an unmolested, undisturbed city; is this responsible handling of an atomic weapon? Who says we are so responsible? Us......... I never said the USA is responsible. The bombing of Japan is the most inhumane act of war (make that TERRORISM) in the history of man kind. That includes the Holocaust. But it has nothing to do with Iran now has it? QuoteIran is not my son. We treat weaker countries as our kids, so I think it's fair to draw that analogy. QuoteI never said the USA is responsible. The bombing of Japan is the most inhumane act of war (make that TERRORISM) in the history of man kind. That includes the Holocaust. But it has nothing to do with Iran now has it? If the US isn't responsible then how can we dictate to other countries and expect respect from others and ourselves? Not the most inhumane, approx 70k killed in Hiroshima, as I recall, and less with Nagasaki since it was impromptu. 6 million in the holocaust and a reported 6 million American Indians by the settlers/early Americans. But we used Hiroshima as a petri dish, as opposed to bombing Tokyo where there may have been some war manufacturing or other military targets. We intentionally hit an unmolested city so we could see the damage - the war had been won, just the punctuation was left. Then after WWII we went to the Bikini Islands, Kwajalene and others and performed Atomic and/or Nuclear testing, which resulted in many cancer deaths and water babies. Point is, we're that hypocritical father who talks of getting drunk and scoring with chicks while condemning our kids for doing the same. Don't wonder why the world thinks we suck. As for having to do with Iran, how can we preach Nuclear responsibility when we started it? We didn't need to use it, but we wanted to see the damage. That's irresponsible and we have no right telling anyone not to have Nukes….. Wonder what Japan thinks of us requiring Iran to drop the nukes? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #32 March 21, 2006 Quote>Iran is not my son. Correct. In this analogy they are someone else's son - so you have even less say over what they do. If they want to do legal drugs, that's OK. If they want to own guns, that's OK too - until they try to use them on you to commit a crime, that is. Good pint, didn't think of that one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 March 21, 2006 QuoteOh ok. Well we'll just wait for them to use it then. Hopefully they'll bomb the USA or Israel and not Brussels. On second thought...better make it the US. Israel is a bit too close and I wouldn't want the salad in my garden to go radioactive. I don't think they have ICBM's. The US has taught the world that if you have Nukes you will not be fucked with by the US, kind of positive reinforcement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tenshi 0 #34 March 21, 2006 Yes. You're absolutely right. Still...a precedent has been set in Afghanistan/Iraq. So it's really not a matter of choice. Korea is next...I can't remember if it was the North or the South so I think it best to invade both. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,259 #35 March 21, 2006 QuoteThose folks have been fighting each other since before Christ. Does anyone really think, we can change them? Maybe, form a huge circle around them. Let them fight it out. Last one's standing... throw 'em in jail for being stupid! They don't 'really' want anyone pushing their ideas down their throats. Damned few if, any. Fighting since before Christ, eh? I've seen that posted a few times now, and I've got to say so what? Historically do you honestly think that makes the region any different than any other part of the planet? Think about Europe, the liberal, peaceloving cultural capital of the world. Also the epicentre of the two most devastating wars of the last century. We changed, in the blink of an eye. So tell me again, historically speaking, what makes them so fundamentally different from us?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #36 March 21, 2006 QuoteQuoteThose folks have been fighting each other since before Christ. Does anyone really think, we can change them? Maybe, form a huge circle around them. Let them fight it out. Last one's standing... throw 'em in jail for being stupid! They don't 'really' want anyone pushing their ideas down their throats. Damned few if, any. Fighting since before Christ, eh? I've seen that posted a few times now, and I've got to say so what? Historically do you honestly think that makes the region any different than any other part of the planet? Think about Europe, the liberal, peaceloving cultural capital of the world. Also the epicentre of the two most devastating wars of the last century. We changed, in the blink of an eye. So tell me again, historically speaking, what makes them so fundamentally different from us? Very good point. I would also go farther back than this century with regards to Europe and their culture of violence. - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #37 March 21, 2006 when you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? 1. when they come towards you? 2. when they make a fist at their side with lowered hands? 3. when they raise their fists? 4 after they have hit you first? PLEASE TELL ME I AM REALLY WANTING TO KNOW Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #38 March 21, 2006 We changed them in "The blink of an eye?" Not quite! It took years and the loss of thousands of lives of our troops. Not too mention, the tonnage lost in war ships and civilian ships. We must also consider the U.S. with it's history of violence and internal fighting and squabbling. Also the fact that we have had 'internal' terrorism since before our civil war... Ku Klux Klan! What have we done about that??? I think, we haven't cleaned-up our own back yard and we are so concerned with soemone elses!? It's real easy to sit back and comment and argue over what other folks are doing yet, we don't do anything about our own problems, right here. Looks like, every country in this world, has problems. Why, do we feel as though, we are the only one's who can 'fix' every other countries problems? Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #39 March 21, 2006 >when you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? If your neighbor has a gun, do you take it away from him before or after he fires it at you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #40 March 21, 2006 Quote>when you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? If your neighbor has a gun, do you take it away from him before or after he fires it at you? Depends on if he's waving it around threatening to shoot me.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #41 March 21, 2006 >Depends on if he's waving it around threatening to shoot me. And if he doesn't show it to you, just says "stay the fuck off my lawn or you will pay" - when do you take his gun away? Or do you just burn his house down? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tenshi 0 #42 March 21, 2006 Quotewhen you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? 1. when they come towards you? 2. when they make a fist at their side with lowered hands? 3. when they raise their fists? 4 after they have hit you first? PLEASE TELL ME I AM REALLY WANTING TO KNOW If it was my neighbour: 3 In the case of Iran: 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #43 March 21, 2006 QuoteQuotewhen you decide to defend yourself it is at which point? 1. when they come towards you? Depends on how, they come towards you. If, it is in a threatening manner, I'd say it's time to defend yourself. 2. when they make a fist at their side with lowered hands? A fist, down at their side doesn't mean a whole lot. Just be ready. 3. when they raise their fists? They raise their fist in an agressive manner, meaning to do you harm... knock 'em on their ass. 4 after they have hit you first? If, they do hit you first... knock 'em down. They get up... do it again. They'll get the idea. I didn't see where, you mentioned guns or other weapons so, I'm responding in regard to 'fists'. Chuck PLEASE TELL ME I AM REALLY WANTING TO KNOW If it was my neighbour: 3 In the case of Iran: 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hayfield 0 #44 March 21, 2006 Tenshi, your repeated posts are hard to tolerate. Go read some history books and come back after you have! From your comments regarding Hiroshima to your post mentioning the Koreas you have managed to convince me that you are an opionated ass, picking bits of "history" to reinforce your specious reasoning. Much like a Bushite would. Also look up sophistry, terrorism and war while you're at it."Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #45 March 21, 2006 >managed to convince me that you are an opionated ass . . . Let's try to keep away from personal attacks, please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #46 March 21, 2006 tackle the ball .... not the player (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tenshi 0 #47 March 21, 2006 QuoteFrom your comments regarding Hiroshima What did I say about Hiroshima that was wrong? Almost every Jap killed by those bombs was civilian. It was a disgusting warcrime and it has been proven that it was really unnecessary. As for the Korea thing...I was being ironic. Next time I'll add a and a Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hayfield 0 #48 March 22, 2006 I stand by my ass comment, while I tend to be liberal, I've seen no evidence to the contrary. As for Hiroshima: The bombing of civilian targets (production centers) was a large part of the second world war. It began when GERMANS bombed London and the English retaliated in kind. It was later found (look up Nurmeburg) that strategic bombing of enemy production capacity (this includes the workers) does not constitute a war crime. Additionally, Tokyo was no longer a valid target as it had been mostly burned in a firestorm created by conventional munitions (similar to Dresden) that caused a greater number of civilian casualties. As for the necessity of the bombing: Japan had not capitulated and had rejected the terms of unconditional surrender which was the stated goal of the Allies (same terms for the Germans). Even after 2 nukes, the Japanese still insisted on certain provisions regarding their Emperor's roll in society. Truman agreed in order to stop further bloodshed, Japanese and American alike. The loss of under 200k Japanese (both bombings) civilians is a lot less than there would have been if an invasion of Japan had occurred. And finally, who was gonna invade Japan? Belgium, France, England? No it would have been the US, with Russian backing on the mainland of Asia. How many Russians died crushing the Third Reich? Millions. Unlike Russians, we Americans don't tolerate millions of our own dying. PS The Japanese started the war and commited many warcrimes along the way. Had they not, I certainly think you would have been spared this history lesson. PPS Fox News is the Devil "Remember the First Commandment: Don't Fuck Up!" -Crusty Old Pete Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tenshi 0 #49 March 22, 2006 QuoteUnlike Russians, we Americans don't tolerate millions of our own dying. Luckily your president doesn't mind a couple of thousand dying in the desert over a few barrels of oil and a nuclear slingshot huh? Might as well put the pedal to the metal if I'm an ass. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
okalb 79 #50 March 22, 2006 QuoteAnother question I have is: Why, does the rest of the world have to be like 'us' (The U.S.A.)? Seems like, that's what we're trying to do. I think senator J William Fulbright described it best when he said: "Power tends to confuse itself with virtue and a great nation is particularly susceptible to the idea that its power is a sign of God's favor, conferring upon it a special responsibility for other nations — to make them richer and happier and wiser, to remake them, that is, in its own shining image. Power confuses itself with virtue and tends also to take itself for omnipotence. Once imbued with the idea of a mission, a great nation easily assumes that it has the means as well as the duty to do God's work."Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
