General discussion


So What is the DMC's problem - with GWB visiting Iraqi that takes some guts

By JimHM ·
OK GWB went off to Bagdad to thank the troops - and celebrate Thanksgiving. Great treat for those serving in the theater when the Commander and Chief comes.

So then the DMC - starts crying - "It was all political." - "It was for next years election." - Yadada - But at the same time they had two over in Afghan - Billary and someone else - I guess she was there to AID the Morale of the Troops by going down on each of them?

The DMC - has nothing better to do the critize some other polictal party for doing the same thing they are doing... I think they are PO'ed for being Upstaged - by a better man

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

156 total posts (Page 5 of 16)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Do you really believe Commie New Network (CNN)

by JimHM In reply to Iraqis laughed at it too.

Come on Oz - do you really believe all that crap from CNN (Commie News Network) -

I thought you always viewed all media information before making a comment - what about FOX (or don't you get that news network) or even MSNBC - there were a few Iraqis that didn't understand, some could cared less and others that were happy he felt safe enough to travel there.

Collapse -

What is wrong in being a Commie...

by tr_member In reply to Do you really believe Com ...
Collapse -

That form of Government doesn't work

by JimHM In reply to What is wrong in being a ...

That form of Government doesn't work - Lets see for example - Russa - China is moving more towards something else since taking over Hongkong (learned about economic power). Lets see North Korea now there's an economic power.

Just a few - Can't say it works ... Russa had long lines for food, clothing - poor healthcare (unless you were a party leader - the select few), everyother person was KGB, you couldn't travel freely around the country, no incentives to advance business or create more wealth - Shall I go on ...

Collapse -

With pleasure..go on..

by tr_member In reply to That form of Government d ...

Who brought those countries down - directly or indirectly? Is that a trivia question :-)?

Collapse -

Tell me why its so good - where has it worked successfully for hundreds yrs

by JimHM In reply to With pleasure..go on..

Your turn - tell me where has it worked successfully for hundreds of years... with a successful economy -

Tell me why its such a good form of government ...

Collapse -

It has not worked...

by tr_member In reply to Tell me why its so good - ...

...maybe. But, the capitalist forces never wanted Communism to flourish. Left to itself, communism would have morphed to something else. But we never let it in peace.

Power corrupts. The leaders of the communist regimes were corrupt. So, that was an additional factor in communism's demise. Let's not associate leaders' corruptedness to the flaws in communism.

I am not saying the world should be communist. I am happy with capitalism. But, let us not phooh phooh other concepts and ideas. How different would we be then when compared to the brainwashed religious fanatics?

Collapse -

Never really worked, was doomed to fail

by road-dog In reply to Tell me why its so good - ...

The US opposed the Soviet Union since the end of WWII, but really worked toward containment, not destruction. This was followed throughout the cold war and various other actions where steps were taken to prevent communist expansion all over the world.

The US could have attempted to bring about the demise of the USSR by simply ceasing grain shipments, but did not do so for fear of the communists launching WWIII as a response to the inevitable uprising from starvation. These grain shipments amounted to life or death for the USSR many years because of the repeated failures of agricultural programs implemented by the central committee.

To assert that this ideology wasn't given sufficient time to succeed is laughable. Since the dissolution of the USSR, records have shown that the USSR was nowhere as strong nor as stable as their diplomatic bluster portrayed them to be.

In the end, they could not supply the guns and butter. Had the US simply allowed them to starve, millions would have died when they turned to expansionism. Fortunately, they went with a whimper...

Collapse -

Were the grains shipped...

by tr_member In reply to Tell me why its so good - ...

....because if stopped, it would reduce the revenues?

Collapse -

Food aid

by road-dog In reply to Tell me why its so good - ...

Surplus grain is purchased in the US to artificially support prices. This grain was given to the USSR as foreign aid.

Collapse -

That's a complicated question

by Jay Garmon Contributor In reply to With pleasure..go on..

You said Trivia, so here I am.

Politics aside, the fall of virtually all Stalinist-Communist countries, besides their ultimately self-destructive reliance on totalitarianism as a means of political control, is largely attributable to the central flaw in Marxist economics.

Namely, Marx argued that all work has value, and therefore the worker should be the primary beneficiary of the work he performs (not unreasonable) and that by extension, the working class should be the primary beneficiary of all the goods and services they create, rather than the factory-owner or elite classes employing the workers (reasonable on the surface, but fatally naive).

The flaw in all this is the assumption that all work is of equal value. To paraphrase Heinlein, give apples, flour, sugar, milk, eggs, salt, and cinnamon to a master chef, and he will turn these items into a delicious pie. His work has increased the value of the items, therefore his work has value.

Give these same ingredients to an idiot (me, for instance), and he'll turn them into a burnt, inedible mess. He may have worked just as hard as tye chef, but his work has decreased the value of the items. Thus, his work has a negative value.

Under communism, all work is rewarded equally, regardless of the quality of that work. Thus, without competitive incentive, the net quality of work, products, and servcies will inevitably decrease, and economic collapse is thus inevitable.

Even if economic communism and political totalitarianism weren't synonymous, communism as an economic model is still doomed to failure.

Back to Community Forum
156 total posts (Page 5 of 16)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums