the

That true Meph.

But i dont think they have the quality of Germans or the rest of us. Like a lot of Asian states, they are more interested in mass production the n in qualilty.

Scotland has given more inventions, discoveries, and great thinkers than any other nation per capita. the only other set of people that even come close are the Jewish.

Its not the Nazis or the Muslims that are the real threat. It always has and alwasy will be the Communists that are the biggetst threat.

China in 5-10 years will be able to take on America....BY ITSELF

The biggest terrorist organization is the flat earth society, spreading thier plans to overthrow the government, and why the government is evil, quit being retarded, or simply hang yourselves.

Quote from: "Sarthos"

If our military disbands, we will be conquered by either the Nazis, or the Muslims.  Pick which one you are, join their cult, then have fun when their leader dies.  
KTHXBAI

Notice that the Nazi's rise to power was helped by the wall street crash, and Muslims are largely hostile because of America sticking it's nose in the middle east.

I reckon if you stopped spending money on invading people and gave some of that to the poor countries that need it, they would be a lot less hostile to you.

Also I think when dionysios said disband the military he meant downsize it and use it only for defence.

Notice that the Nazi's rise to power was helped by the wall street crash, and Muslims are largely hostile because of America sticking it's nose in the middle east.

I reckon if you stopped spending money on invading people and gave some of that to the poor countries that need it, they would be a lot less hostile to you.

Also I think when dionysios said disband the military he meant downsize it and use it only for defence.

I reckon if you stopped spending money on invading people and gave some of that to the poor countries that need it, they would be a lot less hostile to you.

Quote from: "cheesejoff"

I reckon if you stopped spending money on invading people and gave some of that to the poor countries that need it, they would be a lot less hostile to you.

What if we stopped spending money on invading people, and kept all the money for ourselves?  Would that be okay with you?

It looks to me like terrorism is basically blackmail, especially when you say that the solution is  to give money to the poor countries that need it and are hostile to the U.S.  I don't really see how it's a good idea to send the message, "Yeah, you know, this sneaking about blowing up civilians behavior -- it sure is paying off for you!  Have some foreign aid!"

Precisely.  This isn't even a purely American problem; might I note Australia and Spain for example?

Also I think when dionysios said disband the military he meant downsize it and use it only for defence.

Quote from: "cheesejoff"

Also I think when dionysios said disband the military he meant downsize it and use it only for defence.

  No, I meant it literally (as stupid or radical as you may think that is).  Never the less, using the military only for defense is a huge step in the right direction of what is going on now.

  Never the less, using the american military "only for defense" would still be tantamount to maintaining an occupying power or settler state on First Nations' land.  If this sounds too radical, it does not alter the fact that it is true.  Perhaps reviewing the case of sovereign Hawai'i (which was colonized more recently than the american mainland) makes realization that Aztlan is still occupied by a colonialist power somewhat more feasible.

  Cheesejof makes many excellent political points even if he chooses to disagree with me on this, but the US military should be utterly abolished.

- Dionysios

I for one believe in true prophecies which include Biblical prophecies.
  Perhaps there will also be some other power in the mean time (Turkey?), but for the state of israel to become the dominant superpower, then america must at some point decline and relinquish its current status as the dominant superpower.

- Dionysios

Never the less, using the american military "only for defense" would still be tantamount to maintaining an occupying power or settler state on First Nations' land.  If this sounds too radical, it does not alter the fact that it is true.  Perhaps reviewing the case of sovereign Hawai'i (which was colonized more recently than the american mainland) makes realization that Aztlan is still occupied by a colonialist power somewhat more feasible.

...but as the US military is the seat of american power actively used for colonialism, the world would be better if it were destroyed.

Spokesman for maintaining a military, have used american military agressions (which foster reistance)as the excuse for making more military!  This is a ludicrous circle.

People hate the american military.

I will not respond to your vast oversimplification of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq -- suffice it to say that as usual, the U.S. is in the position of "damned if you do, damned if you don't", where the damning is via world opinion.

What if we stopped spending money on invading people, and kept all the money for ourselves?  Would that be okay with you?

It looks to me like terrorism is basically blackmail, especially when you say that the solution is  to give money to the poor countries that need it and are hostile to the U.S.  I don't really see how it's a good idea to send the message, "Yeah, you know, this sneaking about blowing up civilians behavior -- it sure is paying off for you!  Have some foreign aid!"

I just wanted to add a thought.

The US always discusses the intentions of the founding fathers and how we should strive to uphold them. But was there ever an inention to have a standing army?
The function of the second amendment was primarily to give the people a stronghold, so that they would be on equal ground with the government (who could have conceived of wmd's then?) and so they could mobilise in event of war and the citizens band together. The point was that the government shouldn't be stronger than the people and the people should be a part of the governement, and as responsible for upholding the democracy as the government itself.

Jitterbug is correct that the existence of the US Army is illegal according to the american constitution which outlaws a standing national army.  Quite pertinent.  Technically, a standing navy is constitutional, but a standing army is not.
  And history definitely shows that america has become more of a monstrosity as it has aged.

- Dionysios

Why a draft, though? Why not a volunteer army where people are not given enormous financial incentives to join? In those cases, it becomes a draft of the poor, which is equally unfair.