Article

2004-09-26 Down Under

World should get a vote in the US Presidential Election. (HAH)

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anon4021 2004-09-26 11:08|| || Front Page|| [11136 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Login via Bugmenot

USER: unfortunately
PASSWORD: required

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 11:37:42 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:37:42 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Bite me.You want a vote in our elections then petition the U.S.Congres to become an American state.Until then FU.

Posted by raptor 2004-09-26 11:45:56 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:45:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Sure, apply for statehood and admission to the Union and, if you're accepted, we'll let you vote. Australia is a little smaller than California and would be a welcome addition to the US. People who write this type of article forget that responsibilities and obligations come with the privilege of citizenship. America's freedoms have been paid for a thousand times over in blood and treasure.

Posted by RWV 2004-09-26 11:49:16 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:49:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 [YAWN]

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 11:54:51 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:54:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 The world has a vote -- it's at the U.N. If the U.N. enforced its own resolutions, the world wouldn't have to be concerned with the U.S. elections. But the U.N. is both unwilling and impotent. What is the world doing about that?

I'll grant you that you folks "down under" have contributed a lot more than most. So, if you'll declare your independence and boot out all the influence of the royals, I'm certainly open to adding a few more states. Oh yeah, you need to drop those metric units and drive on the right too.

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 11:55:30 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:55:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 All your votes are belong to us!

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 11:58:24 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:58:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 re: australia - bring the beer too! Foster's, Dammit! Mmmmmmmmmm

Posted by Frank G 2004-09-26 11:59:39 AM|| 2004-09-26 11:59:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 "So perhaps it's time to make a modest proposal. If everyone in the world will be affected by this presidential election, shouldn't everyone in the world have a vote in it?"

We-- or our ancestors-- came here to America so we would no longer be bound by your stupidity, your laziness, your bigotry and your impulses toward socialist authoritarianism. We came here to get **AWAY** from your bullshit, and we're not about to let you export it to us.

If your own elections are so inconsequential that you want a say in ours, then perhaps you should think about just **WHY** your elections no longer matter much, and correct the problem.

In short, fuck off and die.

Posted by Dave D. 2004-09-26 12:00:25 PM|| 2004-09-26 12:00:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Hey, WE'RE in charge, so WE get to vote who will run THEM. I say we vote Margaret Cho the leader of North Korea, and Pat Robertson the spiritual leader of Iran (with Steven Spielberg as their President), as a start.

Posted by Anonymoose 2004-09-26 12:27:32 PM|| 2004-09-26 12:27:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 We-- or our ancestors-- came here to America so we would no longer be bound by your stupidity, your laziness, your bigotry and your impulses toward socialist authoritarianism.

Just as a sidenote: Some of your ancestors came to America in slave ships -- and some other of your ancestors came from Asia a few thousand years before Colombus.

And it's kinda ironic to accuse Europeans as a whole of stupidity and laziness and *bigotry*. Imagine a person who says "I want to stay away from Jews because of their stupidity, laziness, and not to mention their bigotry".

The world has a vote -- it's at the U.N.

Well, no. First of all, USA, UK, France, Russia and China have veto rights, and a vote which can be vetoed is no real vote at all. If you abolished veto rights, then we might be getting somewhere. Secondly, much of the world is controlled by tyrannies, whose UN votes is controlled by said tyrants, not by the people in those lands.

I can't read the linked article either as it is login-only, but the basic principle that in a deeply interconnected world true democracy can't exist unless *everyone* had a vote on some level, is fundamentally correct. Isolate communities free of influence from and on others, no longer exist. A democratic Luxembourg wouldn't be truly free if it could be intimidated into submission by the threat of force from Germany or France. Their choices would be skewed. It it could be bullied into submission through trade embargoes or what have you, then again they wouldn't be truly free.

Only a completely isolationist and neutral country, like Switzerland, could claim that its government isn't applying undemocratic influence outside its borders. And even then you get elements that end up affecting everyone -- e.g. secret bank accounts of dictators? If you are part of the world you always affect people outside the moral authority that the consent of *your* governed nation provides.

The only logical solution to that is the establishment of a Global community of democracies, where that influence and counterinfluence is bounded in a system of law and democratic checks on a global level.

Ofcourse having the whole world vote for USA just on the basis of vague influence is ludicrousness, because then we'd have to have everyone vote for everywhere -- everything "influences" everything else. Until such a global community of communities can be established, an EU on a global level, this talk is just nonsensee.

But in the meantime how about a simpler system: Namely, having the people in occupied countries vote for the government of the occupying nations?

Wouldn't you say you have an atleast equal chance of convincing Iraqi and Kurdish people to vote for Bush, instead of Kerry?

And shouldn't what Iraqi people have to say about the situation be taken to account as long as it's American troops occupying their land?

If nothing else, it forces the occupier to be *nice* with the occupied. Certainly it seems to me that UK should have given Indians an equal vote when it was occupying India, or it wouldn't be able to call itself a democracy.

The problem now with the USA is not as bad, because 1) the Iraqis are far far less numerically than the people of India, and 2) because it's meant to be a short-term occupation. But still it exists, if smaller. In a better system, the people of Iraq therefore would have a vote in the US elections.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 12:54:49 PM|| 2004-09-26 12:54:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Aris, does this mean I get to vote in Mexico in addition to the U.S.?

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 1:11:26 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:11:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Mexico's army is not occupying you, xenophobic metaphors about the role of Mexican immigrants aside.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 1:16:42 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:16:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Lighten up.

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 1:18:29 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:18:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 The only logical solution to that is the establishment of a Global community of democracies

Seems Europe is very much opposed to this idea given its opposition to the democratization of...say...Iraq. Criticizing the Americans, our ex-PM in Canada once asked (paraphrase), "After Iraq, who will be next? Where will this stop?" Well, it seems that until the world is fully democratized, it should never stop. So assuming that your idea is a good one, why all this opposition to what the US is doing in Iraq?

having the people in occupied countries vote for the government of the occupying nations

Then might as well not have occupied them in the first place. An occupation by its nature restricts freedom on purpose, temporarily or not.

Posted by Rafael 2004-09-26 1:23:17 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:23:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 You're screeching Aris, that's not like you.

Posted by Shipman 2004-09-26 1:24:17 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:24:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 "You're screeching Aris, that's not like you."

Thanks a lot, Shipman. I had a mouthful of food when I read that.

Posted by Dave D. 2004-09-26 1:30:02 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:30:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Of course Aris is right. That sort of logic would ensure that no President ever considered what is euphemistically called a 'war of liberation'. There'd certainly have been no invasion of Iraq (the Iraqis would still be free to vote 99.9% in favour of Saddam), no US involvement in the Balkans, no Korea, D-Day, no war on Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany. What a better world Aris's utopia would be...

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 1:32:04 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:32:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 No sweat. When Greece is taken over again by the Turks, the US is ask the Turks if anything should be done about it.

Posted by ed 2004-09-26 1:37:38 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:37:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Yeah Aris the mullahs should vote in the U.S. elections, too. They will be damn affected by the outcome, don't you think?

No more ouzo today, ok?

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 1:40:38 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:40:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 I expect the Greeks can take the Turks 8 out of 9 times in any BORDER INCIDENT.

In one scenario the evil Coronels in the pay of Haliburon, sell out Greece and it's lucrative drilling rights to Russia.

Posted by Shipman 2004-09-26 1:43:11 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:43:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 That sort of logic would ensure that no President ever considered what is euphemistically called a 'war of liberation'.

Why? He'd only have to believe that the liberated country would be grateful to be liberated, and then he'd not only consider it, he'd actually have an extra reason to be in favour of it -- since all this gratitude on the part of the liberated nation would translate into votes for him.

Explain your reasoning please -- why are you working with the assumption that "liberated" nations would never vote for the president that liberated them?

Rafael>
Seems Europe is very much opposed to this idea given its opposition to the democratization of...say...Iraq

If you are talking about governmental positions, then the continent was almost evenly split on the invasion of Iraq, not opposed.

For popular sentiment, answered below.

After Iraq, who will be next? Where will this stop?" Well, it seems that until the world is fully democratized, it should never stop.

Agreed.

So assuming that your idea is a good one, why all this opposition to what the US is doing in Iraq?

Because many people in Europe have an allergy against unilateral military invasions -- and by unilateral I mean unilaterally decided. Most of the nations there have suffered a military invasion after all.

And because many people didn't believe that Iraq couldn't be democratized like this? I still don't believe it can be democratized unless the Syrian or Iran regimes were to fall first -- there's a reason most democracies are neighbours of other democracies, and why tyrannies often create a wave of other tyrannies around them.

And ofcourse, because regardless of whether my idea is a good or a bad one, most people aren't sharing it? So many people are having fits over the idea of a simply *European* federation created with peaceful methods, a global union of democracies is quite a few centuries away yet. And enforcing democracy through military methods... that's definitely a tricky one for people to accept.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 1:55:40 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:55:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Yeah Aris the mullahs should vote in the U.S. elections, too. They will be damn affected by the outcome, don't you think?

None of you actually read what I wrote, it seems.

If the mullahs only had one vote each same as all their formerly oppressed people, then to have the Iranians vote on American elections *after* the Iranian regime fell, and while American troops were occupying their country would hardly be a nightmare.

Most Iranians would *like* to be liberated after all, right?

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 1:59:15 PM|| 2004-09-26 1:59:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Explain your reasoning please -- why are you working with the assumption that "liberated" nations would never vote for the president that liberated them?

Explain your reasoning as to why a President in your insane-o fantasy world would want to take the risk. Would Blair? Or do you actually assume that US Presidents are so completely altruistic that they'd put their fate in the unpredictable hands of people of another nation.

You've really lost the plot, Aris. I won't deny it's amusing.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 2:06:55 PM|| 2004-09-26 2:06:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Ok then, since Iranian missiles can reach Berlin now I think every German should vote in the Iranian elections, too.

And since Greece tricked its way into the Euro with forged statistics I guess we should vote in Greece as well.

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 2:08:32 PM|| 2004-09-26 2:08:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Well it looks like the Faroe Islands and Congo are safe Bush territory :-)

BETAVOTE

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 2:11:20 PM|| 2004-09-26 2:11:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Not a problem. We vote and are also obliged to pay taxes and stand by the constitution. If you renounce your sovreignity and become a State and if you are accepted by all means vote. But then you cannot raise a stink about nuclear armed or nuclear powered ships in your waters because they will be your waters no more. It seems to me more & more like a midedle age fiefdom, every one wants to be an underling of the chief with biggest balls.

Posted by Fawad 2004-09-26 2:15:09 PM|| 2004-09-26 2:15:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Did I miss the Ameican participation in the European elections of 1912 or 1938. We got a whole lot of say there!

Posted by Don 2004-09-26 2:28:09 PM|| 2004-09-26 2:28:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Explain your reasoning as to why a President in your insane-o fantasy world would want to take the risk

You mean a President takes the risk of WAR, with thousands upons thousands of people being killed on both sides, including possibly thousands of dead civilians, but he can't take the risk of not being elected again.

If he can't risk his fucking *reelection* on a cause he considers worthy, then he shouldn't risk lives either.

Explain your reasoning as to why a President in your insane-o fantasy world would want to take the risk.

For the same reason that he took the risk of war on the first place.

In this case, such a risk was supposedly taken because you couldn't take the chance of a dictator such as Saddam to possibly equip terrorists with WMDs.

But here we see the old colonialism in your belief system -- the "unpredictable hands of people of another nation". Why don't you call them "subhuman Arab monkeys", to make your *real* point clear?

Some people babble all about democratizing Iraq, and the liberation of Iraq, and they count the possibly thousands of civilian lives lost as an acceptable sacrifice to make in order to bring freedom to the people of Iraq...

... but they can't actually risk the reelection of their favourite president. *You* can judge Iraqi lives a well-made sacrifice on *their* behalf, but they don't have the right to even influence your government.

You can't actually follow through with the idea that a democratically elected government only rules through the authority that the consent of the governed provides them. The consent of *all* the governed. If you have direct governance over a territory, with power to arrest people, or impose curfews or whatever -- they should have a right to vote on their government.

That's democracy. Democracy isn't the colonial-era British Empire.

Ok then, since Iranian missiles can reach Berlin now I think every German should vote in the Iranian elections, too. And since Greece tricked its way into the Euro with forged statistics I guess we should vote in Greece as well.

You already are influencing Greece with your votes through the EU -- which is the case regardless of whether crooks in Greece tricked their way in the Eurozone or not. I've already accepted shared sovereignty for my country. Through the EU system.

Ok then, since Iranian missiles can reach Berlin now I think every German should vote in the Iranian elections, too.

Well, the argument of preemptive attack is that you can not only *vote* in the Iranian elections, but actually invade Iran. Which I may well agree with, since I've been in favour of an attack on either Iran or Syria.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 2:55:46 PM|| 2004-09-26 2:55:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 I see a long and absurd thread coming on...

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 3:07:26 PM|| 2004-09-26 3:07:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 Make us.

Posted by Ptah 2004-09-26 3:29:15 PM|| [http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2004-09-26 3:29:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 I see a long and absurd thread coming on...

clue #1 - Aris and EU in the same thread - works every time :-)

Posted by Frank G 2004-09-26 3:41:35 PM|| 2004-09-26 3:41:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 TGA, let's make it short. As for absurd, that is already immutable, Aris made sure of it.

Posted by Zarathustra 2004-09-26 4:00:02 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:00:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 But here we see the old colonialism in your belief system -- the "unpredictable hands of people of another nation". Why don't you call them "subhuman Arab monkeys", to make your *real* point clear?

We've had it all from Aris today. Insanity, absurdity, abuse, nationalistic insults, racist projection, general frothing at the mouth. I don't suppose there'll be many takers to play with Aris today.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 4:04:10 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:04:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 Cheers, Bulldog. Just explain to me, whether the reason you used to explain why Iraqi voters can't have a say on American elections isn't the same reason that the people of India didn't have a say on colonial-Era British election. "We can't trust the natives to vote sanely".

And please justify how an American president can risk a whole "war of liberation" against a nation, but will tremble at the idea of the liberated nation actually approving of said liberation.

Ofcourse my proposal has an agenda behind it -- ensuring that the occupying forces are humane, ensuring that they stay as long as they are felt by the native population to be doing good rather than bad, creating a system to prevent the possible reemergence of colonialism under pretexts of liberation, making sure than in any future war establishing a native democratic system will be a top priority, promoting democracy in the region by incorporating the population to an already established democratic system and making them feel they participate... so forth, so forth.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 4:25:39 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:25:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#35 You are an idiot, Aris. Your appreciation of reality is immature and absurd. You cannot argue without putting words in other peoples' mouths and foisting your own nationalistic prejudices on them. You raised the ridiculous question of whether vote Bush or vote Kerry and expect other people to take you seriously? Why don't you just admit you preferred Iraq under Saddam? You're a joke. Quit whilst you can still dig deeper.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 4:32:59 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:32:59 PM|| Front Page Top

#36 Should read "...whether Iraqis should vote Bush..."

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 4:34:08 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:34:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#37 Aris, please consider checking into a psychyatric institution. For your own good, before it's too late. This is not to be meant a put down of any sort. I am trying to be helpfull.

Of course, you don't see that you have a problem, but it is apparent to everyone else.

Posted by Memesis 2004-09-26 4:42:29 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:42:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#38 "So perhaps it's time to make a modest proposal. If everyone in the world will be affected by this presidential election, shouldn't everyone in the world have a vote in it?"

Sounds like an Arabs rant to me.

Posted by Fawad 2004-09-26 4:45:37 PM|| 2004-09-26 4:45:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#39 BD, You've got to admit, his English isn't bad. Makes one wonder if he's really a Scot.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-09-26 5:30:35 PM|| 2004-09-26 5:30:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#40 Any takers on how likely it is that even if the world could vote in American presidential elections we'd still be accused of "unilateralism?"

[crickets]

Carry on.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-26 5:40:45 PM|| 2004-09-26 5:40:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#41 And please justify how an American president can risk a whole "war of liberation" against a nation, but will tremble at the idea of the liberated nation actually approving of said liberation.

Subtle point perhaps but "liberation" was #99 on the list of reasons for deposing Saddam. Sure it sounds nice and humane and gives people a warm fuzzy feeling inside, but let's face it, there were more pressing concerns.

Posted by Rafael 2004-09-26 5:47:16 PM|| 2004-09-26 5:47:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#42 Bulldog> "Your appreciation of reality is immature and absurd"

I appreciate reality just fine, since I know that the occupiers will never let the occupied have a say on occupier affairs. Given that, Ptah's response at #30 is actually the only honest enough and to the point: "We won't let them have a say, because they can't *make* us give them a say." All other talk is just nonsense, and any type of effort at moralization falls down flats.

In its foundation it's colonialist feeling just like in the good old days. The only thing that makes it better this time is what I've already said: that it's supposed to be for just a short-term period, and then a democratic Iraq will supposedly be able to tell you to take a hike. In short it's the *brevity* of the situation that makes it different, not any kind of better moral authorization.

Memesis, putting people with different ideologies in mental institutions is what the Soviets did. Don't follow their example. You dislike my beliefs, same as I dislike the beliefs of many of you. That makes us ideological opponents, not candidates for a psychiatric institution.

And Mrs Davis, the sentence Fawad quoted isn't one of mine. In fact I called the sentiment ludicrous since vague "influence" is meaningless and *every* country is influenced by *every* else. That's why I proposed limiting the concept to occupied territories only.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 5:58:55 PM|| 2004-09-26 5:58:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#43 Sure it sounds nice and humane and gives people a warm fuzzy feeling inside, but let's face it, there were more pressing concerns.

Another good point.

Perhaps we can change the proposal to something different (and this is thinking out loud): "If we claim that a war is a war of liberation and that the people will actually *want* us to so liberate them, (in short if we ever pretend to be following the will of the enslaved people) *then* we'll have to give them a vote in our decision until they can vote their own government. If on the other hand we only justify the war through reasons of our own security, then we don't have to give them such a vote."

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 6:05:10 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:05:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#44 FU. There' s a new doctrine called the Bush doctrine. It is called self defense. You guys weren't attacked. We were. I'd rather fight the war in Arabville than here. (that doesn't include the JAckass party and it's lefty compatriots-they go down at the ballott box). You don't like the USA fine. It doesn't matter. The USA isn't running a popularity contest on our defense and what we think is right for us. You want to make it end? Then get the fu__ off our case and take your Muslim terrorist buddies along with you. Until then look for more of the same.

Posted by Bill Nelson 2004-09-26 6:07:51 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:07:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#45 Fred could you test an Aris mod where all the people who are still interested in what he has to say can go and leave the rest of us alone.

Aris find some new material. You really have become tiresome.

Posted by whitecollar redneck 2004-09-26 6:25:56 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:25:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#46 whitecollar redneck> I thought that the problem was actually that I was saying stuff crazier than usual?

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 6:30:12 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:30:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#47 LOL! So the world is worried that we are exercising our right to vote? Oh and they might not like it when their pick will not be elected? Isn't that just too damn bad for the world. If ANYONE in the world wants JFKerry for their leader I would be happy to trade him for ANY citizen that wants to come over here. Hell you can take his low class wife as well. She is living proof that money can't buy class. That way it will be a two for one swap. I guess a lot of the LLL are planning to 'flee' the country on November 3 and I wish them well. I only hope that they will renounce their U.S. citizenship after they leave.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2004-09-26 6:30:37 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:30:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#48 "Memesis, putting people with different ideologies in mental institutions is what the Soviets did. Don't follow their example. You dislike my beliefs, same as I dislike the beliefs of many of you. That makes us ideological opponents, not candidates for a psychiatric institution."

Aris, try to read my post and compare it with yours. If you were of sound mind, you would see what the problem is.

Your beliefs are your beliefs, I don't care. I don't even care if we are on the opposite end of political spectrum (we aren't because politics are multidimensional in their nature--the left-right meme is simply a reductio ad absurdum, but that is beside the point), your choices are yours as my choices are mine. It is completely fine with me.

It is your irrational tendency to reinterpret what people say, and projecting meanings into responses of others--that are simply not there, which is the issue. Your reality and the reality of 99% of people here is not the same. It is not a proof that you are certifiable, but it is a good indicator that something may be off.

I digress. I am wasting my time, almost certainly.

Posted by Memesis 2004-09-26 6:38:27 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:38:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#49 Bravo, Memesis. You pegged it. You shore talk purdier than me.

Posted by whitecollar redneck 2004-09-26 6:42:50 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:42:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#50 Give Aris a break. Would you prefer that scumbag Murat??? ...talk about a nutjob.

Posted by Rafael 2004-09-26 6:50:17 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:50:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#51 Memesis> Dude, if reinterpreting the words of others is the issue, then I'm far from the only one guilty of that sin in Rantburg. Just in this thread, Bulldog said that I should admit preferring Saddam in control of Iraq -- even though I've several times said that USA had the moral right to invade it, same as it has the moral right to invade any dictatorship to install democracies. Most other people here have labelled me anti-American even though I've often said that America is on the whole a positive influence in the world. I've been called a terrorist supporter. My nationality has been itself doubted several times my people who can't accept I'm Greek if I don't follow the stereotype of a Greek in their minds.

And the whole problem is that I interpreted Bulldog's actual motivation to be the same as old colonialist feeling with the inherent contempt for the untermenschen? That may have been very rude of me, perhaps, but hardly as *insane* as some of the things theorized about me.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 6:50:30 PM|| 2004-09-26 6:50:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#52 No representation without taxation!

Posted by Mercutio 2004-09-26 7:06:36 PM|| 2004-09-26 7:06:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#53 Now how did I know before I ever clicked on the comments - just based on the number of comments - that Aris was holding forth?

Guess I'm psychic. :-p

As for non-Americans voting in our election, sure. Achieve citizenship, pay taxes to the U.S., and you can vote.

Or you could just knock off the welfare-statism and BECOME AN INTERNATIONAL POWER YOURSELF. We'd love to have the help.

Or just continue to whine. Your choice.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-09-26 7:13:45 PM|| 2004-09-26 7:13:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#54 Cyber Sarge...Psst! This Bud's for you.

I hardly seem to see what all the fuss is about. Nobody in ancient Greece seemed to mind when they warred on. slaughtered, and conquered others, same with the the Romans, or the Mongols, or the British, or the Irish, or the....(Well ok, so a little wishful thinking there).
The point simply is that liberals live in this abstract world where a warm fuzzy hug and a smile will cease hatred and create world peace. The belief that if you hand out free lunches to everyone, that all the world's problems will be solved.
Unfortunately, that is just a pipe dream. In the real world life is harsh and unforgiving where life isn't worth a nickel.
Aris, if you REALLY want to know what humans are like just go back a few years when Albania collapsed over a Ponzi scheme. It was total anarchy. Gangs of thugs and warlords sprouted up everywhere. It doesn't take much to make a "civilized" society revert to it's natural instinctive animalistic behavior.
If a 9-11 type of attack was delivered in ancient times, I can hardly believe that the Greeks (or any other country) wouldn't be slaughtering muslims wholesale right about now.
It is our "civility" that stays that hand though isn't it? The PC culture of the western world that allows us to wail to the heavens about America attacking Iraq, yet listen to the deafening silence from the world community about what is going on in Dafur.
Then, of course, let's look at America's track record. Of ALL the countries that America has successfully liberated, invaded, defeated, etc, etc., what ones do we still control? How are they doing present day? Japan? Germany? France? etc.
Lastly, if we woke up tomorrow and America and all of it's citizens were gone, would the world be a better place? Would the Chinese, Russians, French, Germans, or Iranians be better leaders? Who would you vote for Aris? Do you really think you would get a vote?

Posted by 98zulu 2004-09-26 7:18:13 PM|| 2004-09-26 7:18:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#55 So! It's Dove season! Anyone having any luck?

Posted by Shipman 2004-09-26 7:28:08 PM|| 2004-09-26 7:28:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#56 98zulu> Dude, you too, you aren't actually reading what I'm saying.

"Lastly, if we woke up tomorrow and America and all of it's citizens were gone, would the world be a better place?"

No, as I've said before and as I quite freely say again, a world without America would be a worse place. That's pretty much the same with saying that "America is a positive influence in the world" which I just said again, in my last post. Did you happen to see it?

Once again, just to make sure you see it: "YES, America as a whole is indeed a good thing, and her influence as a whole is positive, and the world would be a worse place if it were to suddenly vanish." There you go -- that probably puts me in a 5% or thereabouts of philo-USA Greeks in my country.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 7:45:13 PM|| 2004-09-26 7:45:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#57 "Dude, you too, you aren't actually reading what I'm saying..."
Dude, try being concise. You're becoming Aris Kerrysaurus and it's very sKerry.

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 8:11:36 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:11:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#58 But conciseness would just concentrate my obnoxiousness to a higher concentration! Are you sure you would survive such a thing? ;-)

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 8:24:03 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:24:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#59 I've never seen anyone so full of themselves. Sure, shoot Aris, just keep it short bursts.

Posted by Buffy the El Cubo Slayer 2004-09-26 8:28:49 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:28:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#60 Bring it on, Aris.

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 8:30:55 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:30:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#61 Παντα ρει και ουδεν μενει

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 8:35:24 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:35:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#62 Heraclitus was well ahead of his peers.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 8:40:26 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:40:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#63 TGA, 42.

Posted by Buffy the El Cubo Slayer 2004-09-26 8:41:45 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:41:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#64 "The brevity and elliptic logic of his aphorisms earnt Heraclitus the epithet 'Obscure'."

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 8:48:49 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:48:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#65 I understand him perfectly :-)

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 8:50:35 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:50:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#66 "No man can cross the same river twice, because neither the man nor the river are the same."

He was millennia ahead of his own time. Superb!

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-26 8:55:42 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:55:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#67 Very cool, #61 TGA.

You da' man! :-p

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2004-09-26 8:56:03 PM|| 2004-09-26 8:56:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#68 So now we can get out of this absurd thread safely and nobody gets hurt :-)

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 9:00:40 PM|| 2004-09-26 9:00:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#69 Just drop your weapons and back away slowly...

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 9:04:55 PM|| 2004-09-26 9:04:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#70 Anyone else want to negotiate?

Posted by Korben Dallas 2004-09-26 9:09:11 PM|| 2004-09-26 9:09:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#71 Anyway, before this bandwidth orgy ends, I just want to say, "No. You will not vote in the US election." And ima a certified US voter, so I have a say. FOAD. Period.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2004-09-26 9:15:37 PM|| 2004-09-26 9:15:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#72 Given that, Ptah's response at #30 is actually the only honest enough and to the point: "We won't let them have a say, because they can't *make* us give them a say." All other talk is just nonsense, and any type of effort at moralization falls down flats.

In its foundation it's colonialist feeling just like in the good old days.

Thanks, Aris, for Proving exactly everything that you've been accused of. Better to have kept silence than try to "interpret" what I meant.

Unlike you, I was STAYING ON TOPIC. I was referring to the demand that the world have a vote in picking the American President, not to the world's demand to have a say in what we do in Iraq. Turn in your mind-reading license: you just flunked the real-world test. Running to the implication that I said it based on colonial feelings, as if I was an imperialist, betrays an internal bias: That Americans are forever enthralled by their colonial past, leading them to believe that there is genocide in Darfur, while the EU nations, most notably France, has miraculously escaped its past and is incapable of acting in an exploitative manner that would excuse the murder of hundreds of thousands solely for oil! Niiiice company you EU nations keep...

The only thing that makes it better this time is what I've already said: that it's supposed to be for just a short-term period, and then a democratic Iraq will supposedly be able to tell you to take a hike.

This is called thowing a kilo of mud on us, cleaning off 700 grams, and expecting to be considered a friend for doing so. For instance, your statement implies that the only criterion that Iraq is really democratic is that it kick out and spit in the face the only power determined to help it BE democratic, and which has proven that determination by deeds, not words? That NO OTHER CHOICE IT COULD MAKE could possibly be proof that it is truly democratic? Suppose they thought that prudence would require the stationing of US troops in bases along the borders of Iran, and for the same reasons that that US troops have been stationed in Germany for so long? I do not need to prove to my enemy that I am a man by blindly accepting his challenge to bungee jump with the bungee he's supplying. It remains to be seen if the Iraqis are Arab enough to accept an equivalent challenge.

Of course, there are many European countries who have, in recent memory, given us more than enough experience in handling ingratitude for the sacrifices our sons, fathers, and fellow citizens have made.

And at the foundation, THAT is why we believe that the EU is doomed to failure, for you are being ruled by men having souls rendered small by the absence of that virtue.

Posted by Ptah 2004-09-26 10:06:40 PM|| [http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2004-09-26 10:06:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#73 I was referring to the demand that the world have a vote in picking the American President, not to the world's demand to have a say in what we do in Iraq.

The thing about the American President was likewise how I interpreted your words, since that was the thing I was discussing throughout. So I was correct here. My only mistake was that I thought you were referring specifically to my comment about the Iraqis alone participating, rather than the whole world.

while the EU nations, most notably France, has miraculously escaped its past and is incapable of acting in an exploitative manner that would excuse the murder of hundreds of thousands solely for oil!

Actually I think that France often shows imperialist and colonialist attitudes, most notably in Africa.

On the mind-reading thingy I definitely seem to be more accurate about you, than you are about me.

For instance, your statement implies that the only criterion that Iraq is really democratic is that it kick out and spit in the face the only power determined to help it BE democratic, and which has proven that determination by deeds, not words

No, dear. My statement implies that a criterion that Iraq is really democratic is the *ability* to freely decide *whether* it wants to kick out and spit in the face the only power determined to help it be democratic, and which has proven that determination by deeds, not words.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-09-26 10:28:31 PM|| 2004-09-26 10:28:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#74 Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for conversation, but maybe you could just shut up for a moment?

Posted by Korben Dallas 2004-09-26 10:35:54 PM|| 2004-09-26 10:35:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#75 Andrei, you lost ANOTHER submarine?

Posted by True German Ally 2004-09-26 10:38:52 PM|| 2004-09-26 10:38:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#76 I'm screwed.

Posted by Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg 2004-09-26 10:41:58 PM|| 2004-09-26 10:41:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#77 Korben Dallas and Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg explained here.

Posted by Tom 2004-09-26 11:12:20 PM|| 2004-09-26 11:12:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#78 They can vote all they want...but it doesn't count and we get to shoot one uppity European of our choice for each of them that 'votes.' Better yet, I say we start demanding tribute from the rest of the world...they only exist on our sufferance anyway.
It's about time they paid for all the protection we give them.

Posted by Silentbrick 2004-09-26 11:15:54 PM|| 2004-09-26 11:15:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#79 I have a better idea: isolationism.

Posted by Rafael 2004-09-26 11:17:43 PM|| 2004-09-26 11:17:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#80 Rafael, tickets to Mars trip are not on sale yet.

Posted by Memesis 2004-09-26 11:22:43 PM|| 2004-09-26 11:22:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#81 Jeebus, how many of you were doing one-handed typing while fapping or diddling your whacker in this thread? OMG, WTF, you should be ASHAMED of yourselves!

/GRIN

Posted by Asedwich 2004-09-27 2:42:32 AM|| 2004-09-27 2:42:32 AM|| Front Page Top

#82 Shoot. I failed to get the memo on being brief. As penance, I'll be hitting Fred's tip jar today or tomorrow, Tropical Storm Jeanne permitting.

Thank you Aris. I pride myself in striving to be predictable in each of my facets, and get my kicks by surprising people who delude themselves into believing that they've figured me out completely by displaying a different one of them at appropriate times.

Posted by Ptah 2004-09-27 7:37:14 AM|| [http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2004-09-27 7:37:14 AM|| Front Page Top

21:25 Anonymous
21:25 Anonymous
21:17 Anonymous
21:17 Anonymous
21:16 Anonymous6672
21:16 Anonymous6672
21:13 Anonymous6672
21:13 Anonymous6672
07:26 Silk
19:18 Moroccan Arab
19:57 Mrs. Davis
19:56 Sock Puppet of Doom
19:52 muck4doo
19:45 Moroccan Arab
08:14 badanov
08:01 Tom
07:37 Ptah
06:35 Anonymous6334 TROLL
04:51 trailing wife
02:42 Asedwich
02:28 Asedwich
02:00 ed
01:19 Phil Fraering
01:19 Memesis