When it comes to the Democrats, they only anger me when it comes to multiculturalism, social programs and the economy. Then you have the Republicans who are religious nuts, but at least they promote low taxes, fiscal responsibility, and the free market. Personally, if the Dems would relax some of their "positive freedom" crap I would take them more seriously.

As for Flint, I honestly think he's a narcissist and needs to seek psychiatric help.

> EliteInternetWarrior wrote:

More like a sex-deprived nerd with the intelligence of a screwdriver and the manners of a toad. Don't take it personally, I hate everyone here. You less than most others - because it appears you use more than three braincells.>

hahaha. Equal opportunity hater I see. Btw, I can get laid when I want and with hot women. I just spend generous amounts of $.

It's called economics noob. Cultures without christian influence have independently come to similar concepts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laRDBHorh9A

Well, I wouldn't know because I couldn't read them, lol. I wasn't so much offended as I was irritated.

Einstein,

hahaha. A helicopter maybe, but not a F-22. Those stingers the Taliban had were pretty useless huh?

Bief,

True. You need an army no doubt. But it's stupid to have a million army personnel and rely on them to occupy a country and fight opposing armies. Armies should be used to occupy strategic locations.

Schnie,

I agree that civilian bombings in WW2 were often necessary, although the bombing of industry was necessary. Nonetheless, there are clear cases where it is necessary. Saddam had to terrorize the Kurds to maintain power, for example. It also worked. Machiavelli also mentions that when you are dealing with a rebellious population, you need to ruin them. Ruthlessness is probably very effective in a society where they have graphical depictions of terrorist martyrs, and you want to show the people there that supporting that nonsense will be very costly for them and their families. It's also useful to deter a foreign leader from challenging your country. If they know that their people are scared as hell of challenging you, then they will be unable to gather the support of their people.

Although there is a need for caution. If what you do to that population is excessive to where they reason that death is less costly than continuing to cooperate with your demands, then no amount of ruthlessness is going to control them. They must always have the option to live comfortable lives, and if they don't they may as well just consider it less costly to die than go along with you. And in a sense, I don't think we've done a very good job on this in the Middle East. On the other hand, the US's reduction in military prestige has made the world less afraid, and our grip over our peripheries are decreasing. Those South Americans need to know the fear of challenging our Empire. And yes, America is an empire, and you Euros benefit from our empire.

> Schniepel wrote:

I am not really sensitive about multiculturism.. we just have to finally do something to make integration work better. In Germany we are really behind with that.
But goverment has better things to do.. for example to blow billions of money into banks which royally fucked up before.>

Well, I am also talking about the idea that the demographics of an area need to be forcefully changed to cause "diversity." That and they go overboard about making accommodations for minority groups.

<And well human rights.. yes human rights should be there and honored for everyone.
But as long you have people that believe that a certain ammount of power makes them free from having to follow human rights, that concept will never work.>
Yes, but ruling an empire and sometimes maintaining order require that you send a "message" by targeting civilians. Our unwillingness to do what's necessary is a reason why the middle east and south america are wiggling out of the clutches of the west.

and dictators, they have to be ruthless as well. For example, Saddam had to ruin the Kurds out of practical necessity. He didn't commit genocide because he was motivated by ideology, rather he did what was necessary to send the message of "mess with me and I'll pwn you."

Well if that was your point, you could always provide evidence to the contrary rather than make a thread. I have evidence for all my points.

1. Royalty - Check the thread. A little laugh and its foul language and insults
2. Nazis - There are laws on the book, lol.
3. Multiculturalism - http://nemoo.wordpress.com/2007/06/17/spreading-multiculturalism-in-europe/. Just one example of bs sensitivity and a lack of logic.
4. Political Pragmatism - Henry Kissinger is considered a War Criminal in European countries, lol.

So I don't think it's unfair to say that you guys/ladies are guilty of being needlessly sensitive.

If you are a member of [TI], then you are a troll by default.

No, it's perfectly legitimate. And I have no affiliation with Einstein. In case you haven't noticed, I disagree with him just as often as I do liberals. While my beliefs are typically labeled "conservative," I frequently disagree with the Republican platform. In fact, I disagree with the Republican party's platform on just about everything except less government control in the economy and less government spending.

But you see, you wouldn't notice that because you're a troll.

We need to send a message to third world countries that Western citizens will not be treated like this. We value more civilized means of punishment, and well, we have the power to enforce it for our own. When she gets back, though, she should serve 5 years in prison for committing a felony offense.