> V.Kemp wrote:

> Oh wow, they brought crying about gun control in here. We'll ignore the fact that all the facts are against them, ignore them, and ignore the thread subject at the same time. <

Facts? In this thread? Where?

> I agree Einstein. It's a wonder to me that a lunatic Muslim extremist could open fire on so many military personnel and not be gunned down within seconds. <

Brace yourself for a surprise: Soldier take their kit off every now and then; especially in the barracks/camps which try to be as non-military as possible for the soldiers on down-time.

> That's the effect of gun control right there. <

Either that or lack of training, preparation, off-duty soldiers in the right state/place to fight (assuming all soldiers carry guns all of the time regardless of duty).
Personally I think it is due to training: Soldiers are trained to arrest if possible (which it clearly was).

> (If the location was specifically an exception, they _obviously_ should have had more guards posted if people snapping and killing people was such a threat as to ban guns there.)<

Why would the USA military think "They don't have guns, we need more firepower"?

[]

Oh, it's started:
http://www.imperialconflict.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=107039
(

[Less flaming, and keep to the topic]

> Einstein wrote:
> Btw there is still that ex-leader from in the Klu Klux Klan who is a major figure in the Democrat Party...
>
>Miss much today Zarf?
>
>Go get a cup of coffee. If your near plymouth Wisconsin I will buy it for you <

So...? Some of the guys defending my great nation (including officers) are ex members (they are now) of the BNP... do I care? As long as they do their job, no!

> Einstein wrote:
> Get a list yourself. It is to much work for me on a smart phone. Copy paste of hundreds of things is to much. <

So YOU want US to back YOUR arguments for you? Because you just can't be arsed? Then why post, why bother?

stefan whaat?

It's a Hung Parliament, so there's still some hope.
Mr Brown is refusing to leave until there's an actual majority to replace his current Labour Government (good lad!).
The Conservatives are trying to do a deal with the Liberal Democrats, over the next 24 hours apparently.
Labour seems to want to do the same.

Lib Dems need to think carefully.

It's not; Britain is ruled by the British, the EU just makes suggestions. I can't speak for any other "state".
This is similar, in my understanding, to the arrangement between USA states and their federal government, in that there are certain absolutes we must obey, e.g. "No state can make a law..."

> The US has a strong, central authority <

Strong? Where are you looking?

> with command of the most powerful military on earth. <

A strong body is useless without a good head... America's head is currently trying to fix, um, everything at the same time...

> The EU is barely a weak confederation of independent nations each exercising their own autonomy. The EU may as well be compared to the Holy Roman Empire. Great potential, but incapable of serving one central authority. <

PEOPLE are incapable of serving one central authority, especially without some form of greater social paradigm shift. We Europeans KNOW this already... [history, yeah?]

Oh, and what is the difference between a EU state generally following the general idea of a Union, and an American state generally following the general idea of a Union?

Have fun with that.

^^ Malheureusment.
^ Exactly.