9/11 Was Bad, But …
The Attacks Were Appalling, But They Don’t Pose The Threat Politicians Make Them Out To Be.
Are we a nation of irrational wimps? Rudy Giuliani thinks so. On Tuesday, he claimed that if we elect a Democrat to the presidency, we should expect more 9/11-style attacks. This, he assumes, is enough to scare the pants off the voting public and send them scurrying frantically off to support Republicans such as … well, Rudy Giuliani.
Giuliani’s line of argument — though “argument” is too generous a word — isn’t new. Since 9/11, our political leaders have proceeded on the assumption that Americans are cringing, cowardly souls more than ready, when we hear the word “terrorism,” to suspend our critical capacities, mortgage our futures and jettison our civil liberties and our principles — all for impossible assurances of “safety.” The awful thing is, many of us obediently conformed to this condescending stereotype. The United States is the most prosperous and powerful nation in the world, but after 9/11, many of us started to act as if we’re in danger of imminent extinction.
We’re not.
The 9/11 attacks were appalling and tragic, but they did not threaten the survival of the nation. The year 2001 aside, total deaths (not just of Americans) caused by international terrorism worldwide have never exceeded — or even approached — 2,000 a year. Sept. 11 was an outlier: On 9/11, a group of brutal, extremist Islamic thugs got very lucky. Even Osama bin Laden couldn’t have imagined that the Twin Towers would collapse, killing nearly 3,000 people.
Of course, 3,000 dead is 3,000 too many. But keep it in perspective. As a nation, we have survived far worse. We lost more than 100,000 Americans in World War I, more than 400,000 in World War II, 37,000 in Korea, 58,000 in Vietnam — all without allowing our national character to turn into quivering jelly.
Every year, we also lose millions of Americans to preventable accidents and disease. We’re more likely to die on the road than as a result of Al Qaeda’s machinations. Annually, we lose some 43,000 people to auto accidents. For the grieving families, that’s 43,000 deaths too many. But, although we surely could reduce auto fatalities if we chose to make it our top national priority, the Bush administration has yet to announce a “War on Highway Deaths.”
After 9/11, the Republican line was that all future terror attacks on U.S. soil must be prevented at any cost. That’s the line Giuliani was parroting this week, but its effectiveness hinges on our collective willingness to let fear swamp our capacity to reason.
Contrast the Republican response to 9/11 with the Republican response to the Virginia Tech massacre. After the shootings, when many commentators suggested that we might consider tighter gun control regulations, most GOP leaders were outraged: The right to bear arms is sacred! The massacre didn’t occur because guns are easy to obtain but because the shooter was mentally disturbed, and if he hadn’t had access to guns, he’d have found some other way to kill people! No legislation can completely protect us against maniacs!
In a way, they’re right. Not about every detail — their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is dubious, and stricter gun regulations might at least reduce the frequency of mass shootings. But they’re right to say that the cost of eliminating some harms may be just too high. And in the end, not every harm can be prevented. We probably could reduce school shootings by making schools resemble “supermax” prisons, but is that what we want? Anyway, then homicidal maniacs would just start shooting up shopping malls instead. Take away the guns, and sooner or later someone may well decide to make a Molotov cocktail.
To quote Donald Rumsfeld, “Stuff happens.” Giuliani’s right; if we elect a Democrat to the presidency, there will likely be future terrorist attacks on the United States. But there will likely be attacks under Republicans as well. There will always be people who want to hurt us, and some of them will succeed. We can take sensible, clearheaded precautions to reduce the frequency and severity of attacks, but we need to coolly assess the trade-offs and recognize that we can’t entirely eliminate all risk.
Ironically, just as Giuliani was suggesting that presidents should be evaluated on their ability to keep terrorist attacks down to zero, President Bush was insisting on the opposite principle — at least when it comes to Iraq. Expressing frustration with those who see the continued bombings in Iraq as evidence of administration failures, he insisted that some level of violence is “acceptable.” When the interviewer asked if he was saying that “zero violence” is an unattainable goal, Bush agreed: “[I]f the standard of success is no … bombings, we have just handed those who commit suicide bombings a huge victory.”
George and Rudy, you guys really need to talk.
© The Los Angeles Times
I think the problem is they already talk too much and don’t listen enough.
Threats and fear are all the Repugs have to offer.
A nation of pussies. Been saying it all along. Spectators. Buyers and hoarders, not makers and doers. Americans shouldn’t need a “war on highway deaths” to face reality. 43,000 dead per year, 6 million injuries, hundred of billions in medical costs, lost wages, material damage. No death is more senseless.
Rudi is a small time hood.
from last September
http://pwp.surfglobal.net/butterfield/Truth.html
So, Rudi would have us believe only the Republicans can “keep us safe.” I have two questions for him:
1. The president was a member of which political party on 9/11?
2. Which political party was in control of virtually the entire US government on 9/11?
‘Nuff said.
It was not that long ago that the Italians were the undesirables in America.
Rudy Giuliani has always been the Philistine from New York City (perhaps the Ad
Libs could remake their hit song with the line “talk about the Philistine from
NYC.”) NYC had become quaintly provincial in the Giuliani years and the years
following seem not very different.
Did 9/11 bring down this nation? Nope. Bruised and battered we might have been, but not even knocked down. It will take far worse than that to destroy America.
To take down this beacon of liberty, you’d have to tear it down bit by bit from inside. You’d have to gnaw at the underpinnings of strength like the military, perhaps slashing funding in a way that would weaken it structurally and prevent it from performing its duty to protect us.
You’d have to have a commitment to altering the economy so that those rich entrepreneurs and innovators would be punished for their crimes of accomplishment and stifle any thought of actually rising above their peers by applying staggering taxation of anyone who dares to actually be self-sufficient.
Your plan would have to include some way to demonize those institutions that made America great; things like the Boy Scouts, and Little League and spread lies and generate propaganda about upstanding members of society to slowly but surely tarnish the greatness of this country.
To further weaken this country from inside, you’d have to insist on the United Nations as being the lawmaker of this land, and build your laws on Global standards, not on American ones.
And don’t forget to warp and twist the laws of the country so that the dismemberment of healthy babies in the act of being born is considered legal and just, but the execution of convicted murderers is condemned as cruel and unusual punishment. We wouldn’t want for the legal system to make too much sense, if we wanted harm to come to this great land, would we?
And to finally topple this country, you would reinforce a belief system starting with the very youngest members of our society that we all need to be “equal” and we all need to live in the same homes, drive the same cars, and all occupy the same carbon-neutral footprint.
Then, once you’ve destroyed its institutions, halted it’s achievement, and manipulated it’s legal system into disarray, you will have destroyed the once great land of America.
Did 9/11 bring down this nation? Nope. Bruised and battered we might have been, but not even knocked down. It will take far worse than that to destroy America.
To take down this beacon of liberty, you’d have to tear it down bit by bit from inside. You’d have to gnaw at the underpinnings of strength like the military, perhaps slashing funding in a way that would weaken it structurally and prevent it from performing its duty to protect us.
You’d have to have a commitment to altering the economy so that those rich entrepreneurs and innovators would be punished for their crimes of accomplishment and stifle any thought of actually rising above their peers by applying staggering taxation of anyone who dares to actually be self-sufficient.
Your plan would have to include some way to demonize those institutions that made America great; things like the Boy Scouts, and Little League and spread lies and generate propaganda about upstanding members of society to slowly but surely tarnish the greatness of this country.
To further weaken this country from inside, you’d have to insist on the United Nations as being the lawmaker of this land, and build your laws on Global standards, not on American ones.
And don’t forget to warp and twist the laws of the country so that the dismemberment of healthy babies in the act of being born is considered legal and just, but the execution of convicted murderers is condemned as cruel and unusual punishment. We wouldn’t want for the legal system to make too much sense, if we wanted harm to come to this great land, would we?
And to finally topple this country, you would reinforce a belief system starting with the very youngest members of our society that we all need to be “equal” and we all need to live in the same homes, drive the same cars, and all occupy the same carbon-neutral footprint.
Then, once you’ve destroyed its institutions, halted it’s achievement, and manipulated it’s legal system into disarray, you will have destroyed the once great land of America.
“On 9/11, a group of brutal, extremist Islamic thugs got very lucky.”
Islamic Thugs?
Are Israelis who almost daily kill or injure Palestinians ever called “Jewish Thugs”. Was even Ravavan Karajic, ever called a “Serbian-Orthodox thug” after he ordered the Srebernica massacre?
It is writing like this that just ends up supporting the well-founded suspicions of a billion Muslims around the world that the imperialist, materialist west really is waging a global war against all of them.
Gee! I was under the impression that 9/11 happened under the Republican watch. Did I miss something? Did Giuliani?
Clearly the undeserving winners of the 9/11 tradgedty were Giuliani & Bush, even though the Bush team had ignored all warininig signs. This reflects the gullibility of so many Americans.
“… since the murders of Robert Kennedy and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, well over a million Americans have been killed by firearms in the United States. That’s more than the combined U.S. combat deaths in all the wars in all of American history.
‘We’re losing eight children and teenagers a day to gun violence,’ she said. ‘As far as young people are concerned, we lose the equivalent of the massacre at Virginia Tech about every four days.’”
cited from: Bob Herbert, “Hooked on Violence,” The New York Times, April 26, 2007
Nik ~
You want to comment, or just repeating for emphasis??
PDFee,
“you would reinforce a belief system starting with the very youngest members of our society that we all need to be “equal” and we all need to live in the same homes, drive the same cars”
Thank-you. Except for the “equal” part, that is a perfect description of what typical USAn suburbia looks like under the entrepreneurial leadership of you right-wingers. The only thing you forgot was that they also drink exactly the same watery beer brewed by a right-winger in Colorado, they all own the same four-wheeled-thingy’s that turn the the woods into beer-can strewn mudholes and subject those of us who prefer to not drive cars at all to puerile derision.
I wish I could believe the assertion that we are not timorous scairdy cats. This is all the political capital Bush has ever had and look how far he got with it. On the other hand, can Rudy hope to get one more election win by dusting off his old NYFD cap, and trying to scare the people about 9/11 again? Talk about nightmares!
Rudy Giuliani claims that “if we elect a Democrat to the presidency, we should expect more 9/11-style attacks.”
That is very interesting, because if such a scenario comes into existence (Democrat president and Congress), then first round of suspicion could fall on Republican thugs and leadership to have master minded such an attack, with help from links from Saudi Arabia or perhaps Israel. Such a statement from Rudy, amounts to a threat to national security and its democracy process of election. FBI should take into custody Rudy himself, based on this statement now on record and put serious investigation if such an incident occurred. I shudder, what politicians are capable of, to hold or gain office. Rudy and Republicans are desperate and should be consider dangerous to national security.
People call me a whacko, but I am among those that feel that there was criminal complicity in regards to the WTC attacks of 9/01. Bush and Co. had way too much foreknowledge for something like this to slip through their fingers. This is one of many reasons why I think Bush and his entire cabinet should not only be impeached but jailed as well. Hell, let them each ride the lightning. It’s not as if this wasn’t treason.
“To take down this beacon of liberty, you’d have to tear it down bit by bit from inside. You’d have to gnaw at the underpinnings of strength like the military, perhaps slashing funding in a way that would weaken it structurally and prevent it from performing its duty to protect us.”
How about using our military to protect our borders instead of our interests and to engage in worldwide bullying?
“You’d have to have a commitment to altering the economy so that those rich entrepreneurs and innovators would be punished for their crimes of accomplishment and stifle any thought of actually rising above their peers by applying staggering taxation of anyone who dares to actually be self-sufficient.”
Awww. Let’s all cry for the richest 1% out there. They’ll all have to sell their 3rd and 4th homes. As if they’re all “self-made”. Most of them are already above their peers since they come from money.
“Your plan would have to include some way to demonize those institutions that made America great; things like the Boy Scouts, and Little League.”
Who on the left is doing that?
“and spread lies and generate propaganda about upstanding members of society to slowly but surely tarnish the greatness of this country.”
You people do it all the time.
“To further weaken this country from inside, you’d have to insist on the United Nations as being the lawmaker of this land, and build your laws on Global standards, not on American ones.”
I’d say that the people running this country right now are the ones weaking America from the inside. Terrorists aren’t the ones widening the gap between rich and poor.
“And don’t forget to warp and twist the laws of the country so that the dismemberment of healthy babies in the act of being born is considered legal and just,”
Would you rather the women carrying those babies die in back-alley abortions? Yeah, sure, we all just LOVE abortion don’t we? Do you people care about all the children who are already here? You’re the ones that support the genocide of the Arab world.
“but the execution of convicted murderers is condemned as cruel and unusual punishment. We wouldn’t want for the legal system to make too much sense, if we wanted harm to come to this great land, would we?”
I think most people who are against the death penalty are that way because they don’t believe in the revenge-fueled notion of “an eye for an eye”. They feel that killing monsters turns us into monsters also.
“And to finally topple this country, you would reinforce a belief system starting with the very youngest members of our society that we all need to be “equal” and we all need to live in the same homes, drive the same cars, and all occupy the same carbon-neutral footprint.”
And teaching that we should all be equal is wrong because? Talk about destroying this country from withing. If anything will bring down America it’ll be inequality.
“Then, once you’ve destroyed its institutions, halted it’s achievement, and manipulated it’s legal system into disarray, you will have destroyed the once great land of America.”
Yeah sure, we all want to “destroy” America. Mmmhmm.
People with your mindset are destroying the world.
Big military budgets require Big threats to justify their existence. Both party’s pander to the toys for the war boys bunch.
Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU
Our government’s domestic and foreign policies need an enemy. You can’t justify stripping the Constitution without the fear of an enemy. Of course our country is not in any danger of being toppled. So fear needs to be created. Hello FOXNEWS. I left America in 1988 and have never regretted it.
Hoa Binh
Hoa - What country do you live in that is not in fear of being toppled? Might be nice place to live.
America once was united and strong, but I fear that internal strife has weakened it. The socialists, posing as “progressives” to put a nicer face on a tried and failed economic paradigm, are in the process of trying to twist and warp our systems and institutions to meet their political and social goals.
They are bona fide socialists, even though it sounds distasteful so they put a new name on it. You disagree? Take a read of this and tell me it is not so.
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
Take a close look at the 25 point program of the German National Socialist Party, authored by a particularly problematic character from the 20th century:
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.htm
If you can see a structural difference between these two philosophies, and those espoused by the current leftist leadership of the DNC then your eyesight is greater than mine. It’s all based in envy, greed & domination of others.
The sad part is, those who are marching in lockstep with the DNC because they feel they are doing the right thing, do not even have the clarity of thought to know what they are marching with. How can they be so blind?
I’m sure that after the world found out the truth about Birkenau, Mauthausen, Auschwitz and other horrific places of evil, there were many “National Socialists” that suddenly knew who they had been marching with. Everything sounded so good and so right, didn’t it? If they had only been able to see beyond their blinders of political adoration it is possible they could have actually stopped it before it happened.
Sad, isn’t it?
Food for Thought:
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”
Norman Thomas, former U.S. Socialist Presidential Candidate
Back to the actual article itself (for now, anyway; for I confess that I digress), the point is valid.
I can remember times when we, at least as a society, were not obsessed with the idea of being threatened or taken over by others.
Perhaps, at those times, we let the pendulum of expectations in our minds swing too far in this direction, to the point that we failed to see that we were no longer “isolated” from danger by an ocean, that we no longer were “that far away” to be “safe” from things.
Perhaps, because of this swinging too far in our minds, we were also, too taken back by the reality check that things can, do, and will to some degree continue to happen, even here.
Perhaps this is why we passively accepted the repetitive lies, the not all that slow erosion of our civil liberties, because we then gave a knee jerk reaction TOO FAR in the OPPOSITE direction, in our minds.
Because, the fact is that the 9/11 attacks do NOT pose the threats that our politicians want us to believe that they do.
It would take a LOT more than that to take this country down, and if it REALLY got THAT bad, whomever was guilty, would no doubt suffer horribly, for having done so.
Iran isn’t stupid. They are not going to go after us. They just don’t want us going after them, either. They know if they attacked first that they fate over to that of our military destroying them.
Read the 9/11 Commission book and the 9/11 Commission COVER UP book too. They are worth the reading, combined, since the latter goes where the first won’t, but the clarity of the latter depends on the former.
Our government had AMPLE warning about an airplane attack involving buildings. Enough evidence to justify clamping down hard on air flight boarding, baggage, etc. Including anyone applying for pilot licenses.
Had that been done, it could have been well avoided, but would not have served their purpose of needing something to “motivate” us to let them do what they already wanted to do.
The system is adequate, and has been, for a long time, and in place, to protect us from such things as 9/11, had our government CHOSEN to DO THEIR JOB based on the warnings.
The rest of this was NOT needed.
Anything else, isolated gunnings even, although tragic, do not justify this government’s stances, actions, and positions.
Speak of fear mongering….what’s with the rants against Socialism? Is the object to put a frightening name on DEMOCRACY?
Are we supposed to be afraid of government of, by, and FOR the people?
We’ve been trained to suspect government, and to vote for privatization of our government. In return, we’ve been given a government run by corporations instead of elected officials. Corporations as middle men who skim off the top, leaving the “People” with the dregs.
Using the scary word “Socialism” has helped to put us in this shape.
DEMOCRACY is NOT Socialism.
PDFee April 28th, 2007 9:07 am -
Food for thought:
Better that than a rabid nationalistic Oligarchy, whose only desire is to defend the opulence of the minority against the hopes of the majority.
Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU
Is there anything verifiably true in any of this discussion?
Is there a common ground where we can reach basic agreements?
Why communicate at all if it is just to confirm our own biases and beliefs?
What are we responsible for?
What if the world we think is out there…is not really out there?
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2263533546906204689
The senses of perception, seat of the ego, are blinders to the higher world, of which the lower, material, world is but a shadow. We can surmise its source by observing the material shadows of nature, but such a vision quest requires destroying the blinders of ego.
There are ancient techniques that do not require organized religion. The purpose of organized religion is to maintain its seat of power, through the fear and psychology of dogma, where dogma, rather than a personal experience of enlightenment, has been elevated to the status of god and where dogmatic terror becomes the collar on those who succumb to it.
The wisdom of science is to know the self, therein resides knowledge.
Maat, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU
May 1, 2007
As IWW songwriter Joe Hill wrote in one of his most powerful songs:
Workers of the world, awaken!
Rise in all your splendid might
Take the wealth that you are making,
It belongs to you by right.
No one will for bread be crying
We’ll have freedom, love and health,
When the grand red flag is flying
In the Workers’ Commonwealth.
What is destroying this country from within? Wow, that’s an easy one. How about the passive acceptance on the part of the American people (I know, not all of them, but enough) of preemptive war based on lies or questionable evidence; secret prisons, torture, the denial of habeus corpus to those who have been arbitrarily declared “enemy combatants,” the notion of a “unitary executive” that undermines basic constitutionally mandated separations of power among the branches of government so that none gets too much power or control; the open selling out of the executive and legislative branches as well as regulatory agencies to corporate interests (you know,the K Street Project, and the underfunding of or corporate control of regulatory agencies that exist to protect us from things like inadequately tested drugs and inadequately inspected foodstuffs), the suppression and “redacting” of scientific reports that warn of the dangers ahead from human-caused climate change. Oh my, I could go on and on.
“Take the wealth that you are making,
It belongs to you by right.”
Oh yeah, now you’re flying your true colors.
You want it, you take it. You all need to review those 25 points:
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/25points.htm
Is this the kind of “progressive” paradise you’re all thinking is so wonderful?
No thank you.
I’ll take my tried and true Capitalism where I determine my own fate, and others can do likewise.
Armybrat ~
I too was one of your army brat brethren, and followed in my patriarchial footsteps, although chose the Navy as my vehicle for travel and adventure, which both were abundantly fulfilled.
I can’t find the Socialist parallel in the military. It was more of a structured dictatorship from my experience. I had my own private property, I had my own personal space, and no one confiscated any of the fruits of my labors, that I can recall.
Oh, I do demonize Socialism to a high degree, and I’ll tell you why. It fails. You take away the incentive to acheive and advance and you will wallow in a vast wasteland of mediocrity. Need an example? Take a look at France.
How much innovation do you see coming out of France? None. How can you say that Socialism works? Where does it work? I can’t find an example!
Why innovate and exert effort to actually produce when you are taxed into mediocrity? Short term, you can placate some of the underclass by giving them stuff they may have not had, but long term, you’ve just brought everyone in that society down to their level. How nuts is that?
And no, it isn’t about the top 1% getting taxed out of their fourth home, it’s about people like YOU and ME getting to keep a larger percentage of our own income so that WE can do with it what WE deem necessary instead of what the STATE determines is necessary!
If YOU or anybody else wants to voluntarily submit a greater proportion of YOUR income to the state, then by all means do so! Just don’t confiscate MINE, OK? Please?
iwarrior ~
News flash! Fuel can burn hot enough to weaken steel and make it collapse!
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070429/D8OQG8600.html
Be sure and let Rosey know!
http://911research.wtc7.net turned then Mayor Giuliani and President Bush into overnight heroes and, in my opinion, that is why it was allowed to happen. So, might another such horror show again catapult a less than popular President into public acclaim? To the growing madness of our King George, it may seem so, as he drives our nation and the World toward his beloved “Armageddon”.
PDFee-
Family is a socialistic structure. Do you social and share with your family, or are you too busy striving to acquire the latest trinkets and baubles?
Maat, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU
The events of 9/11 should have been investigated as a criminal offense, in full public view and discourse, and never allowed to have been skewed into a pretext for the subjugation, rape, plunder and pillaging of another sovereign, by an errant, self-serving ideology.
It’s always easier to rearrange the playing field in time of chaos and they knew that, took advantage of that. All who voted for this misadventure should be held in contempt. The politician’s hallelujah chorus, we just didn’t know, also uttered by the Germans following WWII, was unacceptable then, and it certainly should be unacceptable now.
Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU
PDFee-
You may look down on socialism. However, do you truly believe that the capitalism in america is such a good thing?
What with the huge difference between the rich and poor in wealth, medical care, education, legal representation etc. Do you believe that the poor deserve to such a poor quality of life compared to the rich because, quite often, they are born poor so don’t have the opportunities the rich have? Are they less of a person because they are poor?
O.K. PDFee,
The our country is taken over by socialist democrats/progressives/liberals, they are in control of the military patrolling the country forcing us to turn our homes and land over to the state and they promise they will take care of us.
What would be OUR choice of weapons! That would be the only decision I would need to make. If insurgents in Iraq can cause so much havoc; I feel pretty safe we as a people with all of our guns and ingenuity can drive out anybody if it comes to that!
If I were to try to classify myself it would be a combination of Green-Libertarian ideas taking only the best of each. I’m an environmentalist but my motto is save habitat and don’t muck with it, Leave It Alone-Pack it in Pack it out. It’s too late to save this species or that, we are ALL running out of room, we are running out of time.
But to conservative right wing AM talk jocks using airwaves belong equally to all of us; I’m a liberal traitor to my country, who hates my fellow man and loves anything that will destroy this country. The only liberals allowed to talk on the show are the one who couldn’t talk their way out of a bar.
I like to turn character assassination around and apply it to the speaker where I find they usually are the one guilty of hate.
One more thing!
If you practice capitalism as a religion; money is your GOD.
Oh yes Don’t forget about the civil war that would start.
“9/11 Was Bad, But…” the biblical Armageddon that Bush and Pat Robertson are instigating will be World War Three and infinitely worse.
“You take away the incentive to acheive and advance and you will wallow in a vast wasteland of mediocrity.”
But what about achieving for the purpose of there being more for everyone? Like say in an employee-owned business?
“Take a look at France.”
How about Sweden?
As far as the whole thing about the WTC being intentionally imploded, I don’t totally buy it. I think it’s more likely that they knew that the attacks were going to happen and just allowed them to occur. I wouldn’t put anything past them though.
Hello this article is wrong, she says that 9-11 was done by 19 Islamic “thugs”. Objective scientists state that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden work for CIA, not for any middle east nations. So she is biased against muslims and islamics
PDFee: “How much innovation do you see coming out of France? None. How can you say that Socialism works? Where does it work? I can’t find an example!”
How to measure innovation?
We haven’t chosen a benchmark yet but i’ll give a few examples…
France: Concord. Very fast trains. Marvelous cooking. The EU. Channel Tunnel. Particle accelerators. The list goes on.
Socialism works, it’s more rational and scientific than capitalism:
Cuba [with an embargo] has a better HDI than Dominican Republic, a similar nation in size but with a different economic model [capitalism]
Cuba’s HDI is # 52
Dominican Republic’s HDI is # 98
I rest my case
By the way: The wealth of USA is not created by capitalism, but by Imperialist-Capitalism [I.e. sacking other nations of resources], just like Spain’s wealth, Germany’s wealth, Italy’s wealth, U.K’s wealth, and most rich nation’s wealth which is not created by the capitalist model, but by imperialism invasions [sacking nations]
skeptical,
I was merely playing out PDFee’s worst fears, because if it came to that PD and I would become allies.
I also wanted to draw a parallel with Iraq’s civil war.
I don’t fear the concept of socialism, in fact I guess I don’t really know what I is, so I will follow your link and find out more. Thanks!
PDFee: “How much innovation do you see coming out of France? None. How can you say that Socialism works? Where does it work? I can’t find an example!”
France was done above. It’s only fair that I choose a few examples of innovation from a capitalist nation:
Stealth Fighters/Bombers, Trident 1+2, S.D.I, Model T Ford, HumVee, Camp XRay, the list goes on…
I submitted a response and apparently it was censured and not printed so much for freedom of speech.
I again printed the information I want you all to have, but again it was censured and omitted from print. This time I am testing and want to see if this is printed without the names of the books I want you all to purchase. Again so much for freedom of speech as we are censored on this website. So much for the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Adios!