Opinions on punishment for treason

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kizmania on November 9, 2009 at 6:15pm

Duke doesn't have a problem with WW2 because his grandma was raped by a Nazi... So he's happy the Americans came over to Europe, and saved his homeland for his people... All of the other wars didn't benefit his people so he thinks they're evil.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Raoul Duke on November 10, 2009 at 4:05am

here's an idea kiz, next time don't post a thread asking for opinions on a subject just call it HERE'S MY OPINION FUCK YOURS! yet again it descends to petty slagging match but as i say many times before i'm going to loose sleep over what you think of me?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Frank Drebin on November 10, 2009 at 5:25am

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Latter Day Heretic on November 10, 2009 at 5:48am

if some very rich american business men had not been funding the nazi's we may had done a little better, and oh thanks for saving us, the first few years when you sat back and did nothing as thousand of europeans died means nothing, but you get a military base attack and oh man its on.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kizmania on November 10, 2009 at 2:56pm

You see this is what I mean... Everyone wants Americans to leave everyone alone until they need something.

Why is it Americas responsibility to save Europeans? We got involved when it was our concern.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by supermanx1 on November 10, 2009 at 3:04pm

i think you should save yourself,.from obezity.......

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kizmania on November 10, 2009 at 3:40pm

Never!

Thin is where its been, but fat is where its at.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Latter Day Heretic on November 10, 2009 at 3:52pm

there is a massive difference between the situation of a world war and a 'war' like the gulf war, vietnam, the Falklands war ( i didn't forget labrat we did this shit as well) etc. i am surprised that you can't understand that.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kizmania on November 10, 2009 at 4:27pm

I don't see that big of a difference at least from an American perspective...

In World War 2 the Nazi empire was a threat to democracy world wide so we took the necessary steps to get rid of that threat... in Vietnam we felt the spread of communism was a threat so we did what we could to deter it... Present day we feel radical Islamic nations are a threat to democracy so we are taking the necessary steps to deter them.

They all seem the same to me...

I realize that we have finacial interests at heart, and not just civil liberties, but that is the way of the world democracy exists to perpetuate free trade and commerce not just civil liberties.

Are you of the opinion that there are better forms of government outside of democracy?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Latter Day Heretic on November 10, 2009 at 7:29pm

the threat from nazi german was far more real than the apart threat of communism, which while it did have a negative impact on a large section of the world was doomed to failure from the start so posed no real threat, in the way that the nazi did.

i agree 'democracy' is the best system we have at the moment, but like all things it tends to work better on paper than in real life. people are a major factor as this thread shows people have different views about key topics so no one is ever going to be 100% happy with the way things are in term of a political sense.

i mentioned earlier the questionable motives for involvement, and i feel that it is the deciding factor in the difference between these conflicts. i do not feel that the countries that have been invaded by us pose a realistic threat to us.

if you do not see the difference as i see it, then i suppose we must agree to disagree.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kizmania on November 10, 2009 at 11:47pm

the threat from nazi german was far more real than the apart threat of communism

I'm not quite sure what you are talking about?

If you mean that the spread of fascism, is a bigger threat than the spread of communism then I'm going to have to disagree, mainly because any totalitarian state is unacceptable, and goes against all the ideals that American soldiers are willing to die defending... Hitlers world wouldn't be much different from Saddam's World, or Stalin's World, or Mussolini's World, or Mao's World...

Any government that embraces "equality" over "freedom" is flawed, and filled with hypocrisy, and alternate motives meant to create an elite society above the rules of the lower class... Show me one Communist Country that isn't a complete contradiction meant to serve the interests of the elite.

Europeans by nature are used to being subservient you guys have kings and queens, royalty, and all that so its not surprising that you don't think communism is a big deal... I mean Socialism is an off shoot of communism.

A Federalist Democracy would be the pinnacle of society in my opinion. We are just going to have to agree to disagree because I'm afraid the more we delve into this subject the less we will agree.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Latter Day Heretic on November 11, 2009 at 7:48am

if you delve into the history of communist russia, it was a house of cards, economical doomed from the start, the threat provided was exaggerated by politicians, much like the threat from terrorist today, that is not to say that they are not harmful, but not to the level that is projected by the media and politicians.

also there are many differences between communism and fascism, and i would argue that democracy tend to serve the interest of the elite just as much as any other system.

your hatred of socialism is unfounded, all western societies and founded on many of the same idea, socialism is the reason our societies exist, working together for a common goal, an army is socialist in some ways, a large group of people getting together for the protection of the whole of society for very little personal gain.

communism is an of shoot of socialism, socialism was there before communism was, marxism also predates communism. they are all different, while they may share some similar ideas they all differ in ideological ways, and in there particle application.

"Any government that embraces "equality" over "freedom" is flawed"

i disagree you can not have freedom without equality or at least an attempt at it, how can we be truly free if there is no equality, you would be born into the life of your parents, never being able to improve your lot, that goes against everything America stands for. an unequal society sounds more like a dictatorship to me, part of being free is being on the same level as your peer, inequality breeds a subservient society.

also the monarchy in Britain is a bit of a joke they hold no real power, it is all ceremonial, they have no power over the legislative part of government or any other.

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last