|
|
| From | Message |
|---|
dmaestro
11-Mar-16, 09:57
|
 |
|
Amen!
Spot on yet again.
|
|
dm
That seems like a decent and reasonable post... right up to the following:
"But conservatives drew the wrong lesson from that. They falsely assumed more was better so they quit investing in the future and began a period of rapacious market based economics that cut benefits, fueled rampant speculation and now threatens the middle class. Again and again as in Kansas and Louisiana we see the horrific fruits of refuted conservative thinking just as the Bush tax cuts and lack of oversight exploded the deficit and gutted the middle class. Conservatism austerity has always failed historically but they keep peddling the same snake oil. ".
I see NO facts or references or reasons for your rant here. This seems like name calling without any substance to me.
|
|
obsteve...
... LOL ... interesting observation, but no ... I'm the youngest of two.
|
|
I was just wondering, doesn't fascism require a disarmed populace?
|
|
JMO
It requires a populous that sees it for what it is. Not what the Fascist leaders want you to see. The German population went right along with it before, and during WW2. Read History...If a Fascist were to take over here, he would first (like Hitler with the Jews the poles and the Russians) designate the segments of the population to be removed.Like the Mexicans,the Gays,the Muslims,eventually the Liberals. They (the armed 2nd amendment hoard) would gladly follow their leader.Thinking it was these groups that are destroying their Country.When in reality their Country is doing pretty darn good!! It is called Manipulation.
|
|
Fascism
does not require a disarmed populace. What an odd notion!
|
|
Nazi Gun Control
I had to look this up because it was so contrary to reality I wondered just how deeply it must be embraced by conservatives. This rewriting of history is known as a "counterfactual," meaning that it is not (necessarily) factual.
In this case it is simply an outright lie.
www.salon.com
|
|
Armed Jews
I do disagree with the Salon article in that, had the Jews been armed, they might have one slightly better. Taken out a few more Nazi officers. Of course, the retaliation could not have been much more brutal, and the article notes the Germans slaughtered millions of Russians who WERE well armed.
Just before writing this I had been chatting with my sister about Leningrad, which had been my favorite city on Earth before I visited Istanbul. The Nazi siege laid low well over eight hundred thousand armed Russian citizens. It never fell, and richly earned the title, Gorod Gorya. Hero City.
|
|
The armed Russians you look down your nose at were the ones who broke the Nazis. Your council is not required.
|
|
What Broke the Nazis?
A brutal winter slowed down the Blitzkrieg far more than Russian resistance.
Of course, the Nazis also had excellent armaments. They were quite effective. Brutally.
|
|
Shiva
It is hopeless. The Russian winter had NOTHING to do with it... It was simply armed Russian citizens who stopped Hitler (and Napoleon).
Obviously! Any God-fearing, patriotic, gun--toting American with no concept of history or reality knows that!
|
|
So it wasn't the Spartans at Thermopylae who were the problem for the Persians, it was the countryside?
If it weren't for the resistance of those brave men and women who also contended with the cold, the Germans would have rolled right through sipping gluhwein.
|
|
Thumper
Um....
The Greeks had no guns of any type. Maybe you missed the memo...
|
|
Pursian
"Lay down your weapons!"
Spartan
"Come and take them."
|
|
Thumper
Arms are not the same as guns. Let people have swords, spears, muskets. No worries!
Again, you willfully miss the salient points. Of course... It makes it so much easier to continue believing what you want to continue to believe in spite of facts.
|
stalhandske
22-Mar-16, 09:28
|
<It is hopeless. The Russian winter had NOTHING to do with it... It was simply armed Russian citizens who stopped Hitler (and Napoleon).>
Nonsense! The Russian winter had a lot to do with it, which is NOT to diminish the importance of the Russian army. Without the tough winter it would have taken quite a bit longer, but it definitely had a significant effect, as it had especially in the winter war btw the Soviet Union and Finland.
|
|
Z
I must conclude your obtuseness is deliberate.
|
|
<<So it wasn't the Spartans at Thermopylae who were the problem for the Persians, it was the countryside? >>
Well that's one of the worst comparisons made to try to make a point that I've ever seen. Almost every variable is different.
|
|
Itchy
What in your mind would be a better example of armed resistance to tyranny?
|
|
Sarcasm
"Nonsense! The Russian winter had a lot to do with it, which is NOT to diminish the importance of the Russian army."
The finer nuances of English escaped you in this instance. Zorroloco said almost exactly this--that the Russian winter was responsible for most of the trouble Germany had razing Russia.
"What in your mind would be a better example of armed resistance to tyranny?"
What? Have you never heard of King Leonidas? He wasn't voted in as king. And that 300 myth ought to be given a rest as well. In reality a force of about 7000 held off a larger Persian force of around 150,000, using features of terrain. Had they faced this force on some open plain, the outcome would have been as different as the Russian's "success" against the invading Nazis, to further demolish a really terrible analogy.
You want a good example of armed resistance to "tyranny," try the October Revolution of the Bolsheviks against the Tsar. How does that sit in your craw?
I'll grant that the American revolution is another fine, albeit older, example.
|
|
<<What in your mind would be a better example of armed resistance to tyranny?>>
Oh was that what it was supposed to be? I thought you were trying to argue that the weather in a Russian winter made no difference since it didn't make a difference to the Spartans (who actually lost that battle if my classical history serves me well)?
You know, Sparta! That fascist militaristic oligarchy. Oh if only all our societies could be like Sparta, how much better off we would be, apparently.
|
|
Itchy
Russian winter? No that was just another of Jeff's tigers. He so likes to slap them around you know.
In both cases the Pursian and the Germans payed a heavy price for their "victory" because a strongwilled, hardy and armed people stood up to them did they not? The same or worse would happen to fascists here. Likely much worse.
Glib suits you by the way. 😀
|
|
Fascism, American Style
Sinclair Lewis noted that when fascism comes to America it will be draped in the American Flag and sporting a Holy Bible. I'd like to add it will probably adopt some pithy slogan like "Make America Great Again" and make scriptural references to liberty taken from "two Corinthians."
Please read "It Can't Happen Here," and take it to heart. Because it probably CAN happen here, and may, without the vigilance of a well informed and educated populace.
|
|
Isn't that what the progs do? Loudly claim America! while actively admitting to trying to change it to a socialist nation by whatever means necessary. One of their slogans, "Forward!", comes to mind though I think I've heard that one before somewhere...
|
dmaestro
22-Mar-16, 15:33
|
The American Dream require a land of open opportunity and freedom for all to work towards realizing their own dreams, not those of the ultra rich and elites. You thumper seek to impose an economic and political system on everyone that history shows produces the opposite result. When a majority consistently support a more socialistic and less darwinistic approach in a democratic society it will happen. Even if you do not concur.
|
|
DM
This country is the most prosperous in the world and still has the largest economy. There are plenty of examples for how anyone, from any background, can become successful and prosper. People here have the ability to do what they want.
Why do we need to change it, other than to tweak inequities and right wrongs being done?
|
|
Softy ...
... I think it is less about "change" per se, than it is about evolving over time ... which we have done as you know ... and as Europe has done as we can observe ... and as others like Russia and China continue to do as well. I also think there are two pronounced extremes ... those who want no change at all (keep it as the founding fathers intended ... even to a fault) and those who want to change everything to be utopia (their definition of what's best for us all). Yes, things change ... and we must make good, mature choices along the way; we must compromise on many things as we make our choices; and, we must ultimately cooperate to get anything done at all.
|
|
I don't seek to impose anything on anyone. Not once have I ever advocated such bs. You on the other hand have agitated for that very thing. Typical tactic. When your side is coming up short, quickly accuse your adversary of doing what you yourself are doing or attempting to do. Because you know such actions will be strongly opposed and untenable, you know people don't want what you're peddling when they realize what it is. So... you know you have to be sneakier to somehow slip your agenda through.
It actually sad for you.
|
|
softy
your ''Why do we need to change it, other than to tweak inequities and right wrongs being done?'' is funny.And correct.But when will the Conservative Congress start this ''tweaking' you speak of''.The only thing they have tried to tweak in 4-years is Abortion laws and Women's rights. That's in the History books now.Look it up.But of course you can't because foxnews told you not to. Pathetic.
|
|
|
