It's refreshing at last to hear someone finally admit that the US under the neocons is an imperialist country

:D :D You may believe you are the best, there are some of us in the world who differ.

It's refreshing at last to hear someone finally admit that the US under the neocons is an imperialist country

Quote:

Originally posted by Azred: <font color = lightgreen>It isn't wrong to be the best, you know,.</font>

:D :D You may believe you are the best, there are some of us in the world who differ. </font>[/QUOTE]*Salutes Donut*

Well argued! :D

The maximum life of the UK Government is 5 years. Is that a long time? It doesn't seem that much longer than 4 years.

The drawbacks of the US system include the fact that everyone knows when the elections will be. It seems to me that the last 2 years of the first term involve almost full time campaigning when efforts would be better spent running the country. In the case of a second term the Government can basically do what they want because they don't have to worry about being re-elected. </font>[/QUOTE]If the Coalition falls apart is there not a call for EARLY elections? There is no such thing here in the USA. Here it is 4 years no matter what, Now if your system works for you people, more power to you! I wish you all the happiness in the world, carry on and all that kind of stuff. That kind of system is not what we have here, our gov't wasn't designed that way. Until the 2000 elections there was no draw back to knowing when the elections would be, it alowed for an easy transition of power, as designed by the founding fathers. As for the time line on the terms basicly you are correct, but guess what we like it that way, it's the way we do things, it is not a disadvantage to us. You gots to play the cards you was dealt. ;)

Don't know where you get your ideas from John D. When was the last coalition Government in the UK?

As for our system - I never claimed it works for me, it doesn't and that's why I no longer vote. But that's got nothing to do with your reasoning.

Don't know where you get your ideas from John D. When was the last coalition Government in the UK?

As for our system - I never claimed it works for me, it doesn't and that's why I no longer vote. But that's got nothing to do with your reasoning. </font>[/QUOTE]I didn't say there currently was a coalition gov't "ole holey pastry", the discusion was about multi-party systems(as in more then 2 parties). Now the vast majority of Parlamentary/PM systems on this dust ball we call Earth, do have to form a coalition, at some time, in order to get a PM and a gov't. So what if the UK at this present time doesn't have a coalition, big woopty-doo. In no way does that mean in the future there will not be one. If there is not a clear majority would not there be a scramble to form a coalition? Do the laws of the UK forbid coalitions? Now I understand you seem to have a hard time following that reasoning, you were the one that made the point of 5 years MAXIMUM being not such a long time compared to 4 years. Now where I come from the word Maximum means (in ecesence) NO more then, but it could be less then. Now there can be a no confidence vote that calls for early elections, usualy because of the coalition falling apart BUT not limited to that reason. The point is there is no such animal here in the USA. We don't do that we have a set time winner take all, more then 2 parties here would ensure a victory for the largest party damn near everytime. I don't give a rats rear end if you vote or not, form what I can tell that is your call to make.

[ 11-03-2004, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

Well, Donut, we took your advice. Let's hope this administration fails so horribly there is no doubt as to the idiocy of the preemptive action doctrine.

Let's hope for an utter failure in Iraq. Let's hope the US defaults on its debt, and that China and Japan decide (like France and Germany) that it can no longer lend us money. Let's hope we run out of money to support the troops, and have to cut 1/2 our domestic programs just to pay to get them back home. Let's hope our children fail horribly, and a whole generation of dumber-than-dumb Americans result. Let's hope for 10%+ unemployment. Let's hope for more terrorist attacks, especially at the ports to highlight our failures to protect them. Let's hope for environmental disaster, killing many innocents. Let's hope for a 100,000 hectares of clear-cut "healthy forests" and dozens of extinct species. Let's hope we lose every ally in the war on terror. Let's hope a failed Iraq drives Halliburton bankrupt. Let's hope for rampant senior citizen death rates, to highlight the failures of our medical system.

Let's hope for all these things, because it will be better for us all in the long run. A little suffering over the next 4 years -- so that we never make such a collosal screw-up again.

Let us hope. Let us pray.

<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
TL that is hardly being a gracious looser. So far it looks like the winners have better manners than the loosers.

Donut, being the best and listening to the advice from nations who have previously squandered super power status, doesn't seem like the wisest course of action....why would a nation seek guidance from nations who lost their former greatness to sink into mediocrity? Im not talking about one nation in particular...there have been several nations on that side of the Atlantic who once held everything in their grasp....Personally I think the US should ignore any advice on how to proceed from them and continue to try and chart new territory. If we fail let it be by our own hands and not because we listend to those who have come and gone before.

And I of course completely disagree with your assessment of the US being imperialistic. [img]smile.gif[/img] But we so rarely agree on anything, that that is no surprise....

The US has some hard work to do in the future and it would be in the best interest of all western civilizations to work with us andnot against us, our allies and our....well the people who used to depend on us to protect them, will eventually see I think that it is in all our best interest to put petty jealousies behind us and join to fight the current threat to our ways of life....unless you don't mind converting to Islam.
</font>

Graciousness is for pussies and nice guys. I am neither. I thought you knew that.

The point is that Donut's post points out the real quandry I'm in. Our path as a nation is one that attacks the environment with aplomb, attacks gay rights, spends with profligacy, and ignores the accepted rules of peace/war. We have reaffirmed this path by choosing GWB yet again.

So, a dilemma:

1. Hope for good for the US for the next 4 years -- which would confirm you can do these IMO evil things and still prosper; or
2. Wish my country ill so that my central beliefs will be proven true, and so we can correct our course after abject failures over the 2004-2008 period.

Either way, it's lose-lose for me.

[ 11-03-2004, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

We have a multi party system and the last time we had a coalition was during WWII. There would be no scramble, there would be an effort fo form a consensus Government. I really don't find it difficult to follow your reasoning at all. In fact I find your reasoning to be very simple. And I don't give a tinker's cuss what you don't give a rat's rear end about. Although I'm suprised you find the need to tell me so.

In which case why do you ask us to join in your imperialistic escapades.

I think you'll find it was an American who said he believes "the US is the new Rome"

More assumptions! I can only convert if I'm already something else.