Dutch goverment resigns

[Alexander]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Grojlach: quote: Originally posted by andrewas: In the UK we dont have the death penalty - and whats the result? Millions of pounds of taxpayers money (including mine) get spent keeping prisoners in prison - even when its not luxurious is expensive.

Why do people keep saying that keeping prisoners in prison is more expensive that executing them? As that's not true. The death penalty costs a lot more of the money of tax payers actually, in order to execute someone in the US enormous amounts of money are spent in lawsuit cases and thorough investigations, and especially several appeals. And that is a whole lot more than food, clothing and "shelter" for that person for the rest of his life.
I've posted the link to the investigation implicating the aboveon this board before in another thread, can't be bothered to search for it now. Probably one of the times the death penalty was discussed on this board. [/QUOTE]Thats an artificial cost Grojlach, in actuality after the person is convicted in theory (if we could get a decent justice system) it should cost roughly 57 cents to execute a prisoner, based on current ammo costs. Any cost over and above that are artificial costs induced by our current justice system. I AM aware that not everyo9ne convicted is guilty, but thankfully with DNA and other new testing, we are rapidly becoming able to at least clear the innocent. There are many tens of thousands of cases where the criminal is quilty without a bdoubt, has even admitted it and yet they suck up millions and millions of dollars in resources. Murders, rapists, and the like have no benefit to society and should be dealt with like the trash they are.[/QUOTE]Rapists, too? You think we should kill rapists? I think that was done for a time, until people realized that since a rapist was going to die for his crimes, why not kill the victim as well?

Our justice system will never be 100% perfect. We will always wrongly prosecute someone, and we will always let a guilty person go free in some cases. Setting aside the moral implications of the barbaric death penalty, I cannot for the life of me even begin to defend it until and unless our justice system becomes 100% perfect, with NO room for error. Even one innocent person killed by the death penalty is enough reason to have it banned. At least with life w/out parole, you can still release people you realize are innocent and they can live the rest of their lives in peace.

[Alexander]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Alexander: quote: Originally posted by Arledrian: [qb] []

Hey, I don't object to the United States taking out bin Laden. I just object to the fact that many innocent civilians were killed in the process and we really didn't even try to do anything about it. I object to the fact that the president and his fellow Republicans bash anyone who raises questions about the war in a McCarthyesque way and calls them "unpatriotic". I object to the fact that we didn't seek the UN's approval first. I object to the fact that we're torturing prisoners, and I object to the fact that suddenly, taking out Osama bin Laden is no longer the top priority (probably because we can't find him).[/QUOTE]Do you live in the same world that I do?? We didn't do anything to try and limit casualties??? ARE YOU NUTS? The US military more than any other military organization in history tries to limit civilian casualties, Men and Women of the US armed forces die each year because of the way we conduct our operations to limit civilian casualties, my god, you act like we are dropping bombs like it was done in world war 2.[/QUOTE]I assure you, I am quite sane, and please refrain from questioning my sanity when many of your wishes and proposals are barbaric and immoral.

One of the driving reasons we spend so much to develop "smart" bombs is so we can hit ONLY the target we intend to. Our pilots fly overly complicated highly dangerous routes all devised just to avoid the possibility of harming civilians.

Well, apparently these "smart" bombs aren't as smart as you think, because just today I read that we accidentally killed some Canadian troops. And I've heard many reports coming out of Afghanistan (and Serbia when we were bombing it) that many of our so-called "smart" bombs have killed innocent people.

You accused me of not having seen the world, you were wrong there and now it appears you know NOTHING about US Military doctrine.

I didn't accuse you of not having seen the world. I accused you of forcing your opinions and beliefs upon others, even though you claim you have seen the world. Most people learn that everyone has a right to choose their own lifestyle, unfortunately you did not, and you sound an awful lot like a typical arrogant American. Strange, I think, for some one as well-traveled as yourself.

Finally, if I know nothing about US Military doctrine, than you know nothing about current events, because despite all the lip service Rumsfeld and the rest have given to protecting civilians, hundreds, if not thousands, were killed by US bombs since October. And what do we do in return? Drop a little bit of food (not enough to actually feed these starving people) so that we can remind them that we're on their side. And we're supposed to be saving these people...

[Alexander]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Alexander: quote: As for the Israeli issue, the tactic you suggest has been tried and failed so many times its hard to cuont them all, there is another solution, just kill all the palistinians....that would end the conflict, but no one really likes that idea so it isn't going to happen.

That is a horribly barbaric solution, and only the sickest of the sick would dare propose genocide!

Israel has had plenty of provocation to go in and occupy all of the west bank, but thats just an opinion and it is irrelevant, since the stated goal of the PLO and the surrounding arab nations is the elimination of the jews, I do believe the Israelis have the right to do whatever they deem nesecary to survive as a race and a nation.

Okay - suppose Russia grabs some displaced persons and decides to create a country for them. Not in its own borders, mind you, but in ours. It sets up a nice comfy little country in what used to be New England, and all New Englanders (including this one) are ejected, and the closest we can get to our homes is New York. Or, if this will hit closer to home, suppose they occupy Maryland and throw you out of your home.

And then, when all is said and done, Russia and the new country's residents wonder why, when they give you Baltimore back, you don't just shut up about it.

Do these people want to eliminate Isreal? I'm sure they do! I'm sure if I were in a similar situation, I'd want my home back as well. The suicide bombings are the product of religious fanaticism and frustration - frustration that the Israeli leadership continues to oppress them. I don't support the suicide bombers, but I feel for the Palestinians, many of whom are innocent people who just want their homes back.

The situation won't get better by killing Palestinians. And, guess what? It won't get better by killing Israelis. It will get better when the now-displaced Palestinians have a country of their own once again.

Unfortunately, Sharon is a lunatic and Arafat is rather weak at this point, so negotiations aren't going to make much headway. I approve of Colin Powell's efforts (and I'm glad to see the Bush administration is finally backing away from Sharon), but I doubt it'll do much good in the long run. The administration most likely to broker a peace deal in that area was unfortunately cheated out of victory by a bunch of illegal absentee military ballots.[/QUOTE]Alex you are out of it again, the USA did not create Israel, and the lad that was used to create it was not stolen from anyone. I don't have tiime or patience to do a history leson for you but look it up.[/QUOTE]No, the USA did not create Israel, the UN did. It was not one of the UN's finer moments, as this was one time where they came to a lopsided verdict in favor of the US. Now, if the UN sided with, say, Russia in my hypothetical case, we'd never accept that. Oh, no, that would be too much.

If you think the land "wasn't stolen from anyone", maybe you yourself need a history lesson. Do you think the area was barren before the Israelis got there? Why do you think so many Palestinians (it was called "Palestine" before it was called Israel, maybe you'll see the connection there) are so pissed off? Are the Palestinians not people?

Better yet, if the land wasn't stolen from anyone, maybe you should go to the West Bank and tell the Palestinians that. I'm sure they'll greet you with open arms if you spout platitudes like that.

Originally posted by Alexander: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: [qb] . If you talk about One persons We have an American Fugitive in the netherlands his asylum application got accepoted bcause in the US he's not sure of his life And the reason? He has different political views Nothing more nothing less he never did anything dangerous and sayd nothing worse then i have I think you have been misinformed on this, we do nOT arrest people for their opinions and to say this guy had to flee just because he disagreed with the government is definately not telling the whole story. I myself frequently criticize the government, I unlike Alexander realize the gun laws in this country are not LAX, it is the enforcement of those laws that is lax, and I frequently protest, complain and in other ways let my representative know what I think about the current policies, Ive never once feard being arrested just because I differed with the local, state or federal governments.

We could have an excellent system like in the UK, where there are approximately 10-20 firearm deaths each year.
Or, we could continue on our present path and have some insanely high number in the 5-6 digit range just to Charlton Heston can be happy.

Of course, UK forbids the use of firearms at all...[/QUOTE]And not to knock the UK but look at its global standing among nations, it is just another medium sized country. So should we do everything the way they do it?

You don't like firearm deaths?? Fine, then enforce the laws that already exist, did you know that it has been illegal to use a firearm to comit murder for more than a century...so why do we need 347 (and counting) new laws to make it more illegal? Do you think that criminals will quit getting firearms if you make them all illegal..oh...wait..it is already illegal for a felon to posses one...hmmm seems to me that the problem lays in law ENFORCEMENT and not in what laws exist. Making something illegal does not make it go away, just look at drugs, just look at prohibition..banning things does not fix the problem. Enforce the laws, make the punishments HARSH, again I will state my personal feeling that petty criminals and thugs be subject to public caning, to take place in their neighborhoods..I guarentee the petty crime will diminish rapidly, and behind that harsh cruel conditions in the prisons will endsure people are AFRAID of going to jail. Punishments NEED to be harsh and decisive if they are going to work. I cite Singapore and its very clean and safe city streets. Only problem there is the people have NO freedom Brittain has MORE than it's fair share of problems, adopting their methods is not going to fix our country.

[quote]Originally posted by Alexander:

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:

Originally posted by Alexander: [qb] .

No, the USA did not create Israel, the UN did. It was not one of the UN's finer moments, as this was one time where they came to a lopsided verdict in favor of the US. Now, if the UN sided with, say, Russia in my hypothetical case, we'd never accept that. Oh, no, that would be too much. If you think the land "wasn't stolen from anyone", maybe you yourself need a history lesson. Do you think the area was barren before the Israelis got there? Why do you think so many Palestinians (it was called "Palestine" before it was called Israel, maybe you'll see the connection there) are so pissed off? Are the Palestinians not people? Better yet, if the land wasn't stolen from anyone, maybe you should go to the West Bank and tell the Palestinians that. I'm sure they'll greet you with open arms if you spout platitudes like that.

So you are saying that the former Soviet Socialist Republic has the moral high ground eh? hmmm well Im sure you would have been welcome to go live there in that wonderful socialist paradise...if it still existed.

As for the land that is now Israel, I do believe..(and I could be wrong..I dont have time to check for sure) the land at the time was subject to British law...all I know is that the "Governing body" responsible for the land legally granted it to the Israeli's And do not forget that Jordan and Syria and Egypt caused the current problems in the Gaza and west bank by exterminating large quantities of Palistinians and forcing them off the land that they occupied in those countries. So go bitch at them for pushing the palistinians off their land.

[quote]Originally posted by Alexander:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MagiK:

Originally posted by Alexander: [qb] I didn't accuse you of not having seen the world. I accused you of forcing your opinions and beliefs upon others, even though you claim you have seen the world. Most people learn that everyone has a right to choose their own lifestyle, unfortunately you did not, and you sound an awful lot like a typical arrogant American. Strange, I think, for some one as well-traveled as yourself. .

I won't argue that I may be arrogant, but you lie by implying that it is only americans who are arrogant. Arrogance is born out of confidence and surety, I am confident in my observations (my personal observations) and in my ability to see and assess situations as they exist around me.

You accuse me of forcing my beliefs on others, to my knowledge not one single person today live in subjugation under my tyranical rule. Or do you mean tht by expressing my opinions and views that Im forcing them on others?? In that case no one is allowed to say anything for fear of "forcing their views" on them.

I notice you are pretty picky about which things you respond to, no apology for the incorrect assumptions you made, no admitting that you erred. you seem pretty darn arrogant yourself [img]smile.gif[/img] however you mention my questioning of your sanity. I thought you a citizen of the USA, see here in this country that particular phrase is used commonly and is almost never taken as an implication of a persons actual sanity, but is ment as an expression of disbelief. Please forgive the use of a typical american idiom.

[Spelca]

Originally posted by MagiK: (...) Enforce the laws, make the punishments HARSH, again I will state my personal feeling that petty criminals and thugs be subject to public caning, to take place in their neighborhoods..I guarentee the petty crime will diminish rapidly, and behind that harsh cruel conditions in the prisons will endsure people are AFRAID of going to jail. Punishments NEED to be harsh and decisive if they are going to work. (...) [/QB]

Hey, let's bring back public hangings too. That would really help against crime, wouldn't it? [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Spelca]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Dreamer128: quote: Originally posted by Katherine: ... . . . [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] I think bunnies should take over the world. [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] . . . . [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] . . . . . . . [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] ................................. [img]graemlins/bunny.gif[/img] !

I'll second that. Live would be a whole lot simpler.[/QUOTE]Did you know that bunnies in the REAL world have a pretty vicious nature? that males eat their young? and are totaly unfaithful to their spouses?[/QUOTE]Ooh, bunnies aren't much better than us then. We're vicious, we kill other people and we are unfaithful to our spouses.

[Alexander]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Alexander: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: [qb] . If you talk about One persons We have an American Fugitive in the netherlands his asylum application got accepoted bcause in the US he's not sure of his life And the reason? He has different political views Nothing more nothing less he never did anything dangerous and sayd nothing worse then i have I think you have been misinformed on this, we do nOT arrest people for their opinions and to say this guy had to flee just because he disagreed with the government is definately not telling the whole story. I myself frequently criticize the government, I unlike Alexander realize the gun laws in this country are not LAX, it is the enforcement of those laws that is lax, and I frequently protest, complain and in other ways let my representative know what I think about the current policies, Ive never once feard being arrested just because I differed with the local, state or federal governments.

We could have an excellent system like in the UK, where there are approximately 10-20 firearm deaths each year.
Or, we could continue on our present path and have some insanely high number in the 5-6 digit range just to Charlton Heston can be happy.

Of course, UK forbids the use of firearms at all...[/QUOTE]And not to knock the UK but look at its global standing among nations, it is just another medium sized country. So should we do everything the way they do it?

You don't like firearm deaths?? Fine, then enforce the laws that already exist, did you know that it has been illegal to use a firearm to comit murder for more than a century...so why do we need 347 (and counting) new laws to make it more illegal? Do you think that criminals will quit getting firearms if you make them all illegal..oh...wait..it is already illegal for a felon to posses one...hmmm seems to me that the problem lays in law ENFORCEMENT and not in what laws exist. Making something illegal does not make it go away, just look at drugs, just look at prohibition..banning things does not fix the problem. Enforce the laws, make the punishments HARSH, again I will state my personal feeling that petty criminals and thugs be subject to public caning, to take place in their neighborhoods..I guarentee the petty crime will diminish rapidly, and behind that harsh cruel conditions in the prisons will endsure people are AFRAID of going to jail. Punishments NEED to be harsh and decisive if they are going to work. I cite Singapore and its very clean and safe city streets. Only problem there is the people have NO freedom Brittain has MORE than it's fair share of problems, adopting their methods is not going to fix our country.[/QUOTE]Just another medium-sized country? What planet do you live on? The UK is among the most powerful nations in the world. It is the USA's closest and most powerful ally. Just because the British Empire no longer exists does not make the UK a "medium-sized country" by any stretch of the imagination.

Obviously, in your travels, you have never been to the UK, otherwise you'd know what you're talking about.

Second, why do some people feel it is necessary to own assault rifles and machine guns? The mentality of the right-wingers and the NRA is that if we take away assault rifles, we'll take away everything. When will these people wake up and learn that assault rifles = more gun deaths? Like it or not, anyone who owns a gun is statistically much more likely to kill a family member or friend than an "intruder". Going by pure facts and statistics, guns probably should've been banned long ago, but then, there is that small but powerful group of right-winger wackos in this country who NEED their guns for some unfathomable reason.

If you want harsh punishments and caning in the streets, fine. Go move to Singapore (where, NOT by coincidence, there is no freedom). But don't complain if you or a loved one is wrongly accused of jaywalking and beaten senseless.

Do we need to punish everyone for every little infraction of the law, no matter how trivial? What about drug users? Many have been brought back from the brink and been saved from drug addiction, should those people have been punished instead?

[Alexander]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Alexander: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Originally posted by Alexander: [qb] . No, the USA did not create Israel, the UN did. It was not one of the UN's finer moments, as this was one time where they came to a lopsided verdict in favor of the US. Now, if the UN sided with, say, Russia in my hypothetical case, we'd never accept that. Oh, no, that would be too much. If you think the land "wasn't stolen from anyone", maybe you yourself need a history lesson. Do you think the area was barren before the Israelis got there? Why do you think so many Palestinians (it was called "Palestine" before it was called Israel, maybe you'll see the connection there) are so pissed off? Are the Palestinians not people? Better yet, if the land wasn't stolen from anyone, maybe you should go to the West Bank and tell the Palestinians that. I'm sure they'll greet you with open arms if you spout platitudes like that. So you are saying that the former Soviet Socialist Republic has the moral high ground eh? hmmm well Im sure you would have been welcome to go live there in that wonderful socialist paradise...if it still existed. As for the land that is now Israel, I do believe..(and I could be wrong..I dont have time to check for sure) the land at the time was subject to British law...all I know is that the "Governing body" responsible for the land legally granted it to the Israeli's And do not forget that Jordan and Syria and Egypt caused the current problems in the Gaza and west bank by exterminating large quantities of Palistinians and forcing them off the land that they occupied in those countries. So go bitch at them for pushing the palistinians off their land.

You obviously don't read my posts at all - heaven forbid, you might learn something.

I'm saying that you would no doubt object if Russia decided that Maryland was a nice little place to put its displaced persons and the UN agreed. So why should the Palestinians not be pissed when the US and the UK decide that Palestine is a nice little place to put some displaced persons, and the UN agrees? I would object to both situations, why don't you? Possibly because there is a double standard, here?

As for the "facts" you have just stated, I can't even understand what you're saying. Clean up your grammar, post some links, and then I'll know what you're talking about.