DebateGate

  Was freeing the opressed the main reason for sending thousands of Americans to Europe in 1943?

You are attempting to set the terms for "racist", etc.

Racism is derogatory comments, actions, words and so on against another race. To expand to include attitudes against another nationality, for example, is totally inaccurate and succumbs to the current political correctness in vogue today. This resetting of terminology, as is revisionist history, is continuing as the cultureal and political landscape is changing. This, however, does not means we have to "buy into" this transition.

I did not see anythnig racist in the post. I did see some concern by the author about the effects, primarily in the disease arena, of immigration. This concern coud also be phrased in a similar vein via Plane's example, or by you going out of the country, residing in anothger country for awhile and then returning back here. Same issue. Nothnig to do with racism.

An aspect I do agree with in the article is the concern of how illegal immigrants may be putting strains on the medical community. The issue, of course, is how do they pay for this so the strain is at least lessened. Maybe they can somehow be taxed?

Doing nothing would have left Saddam where he was .

A Decade earlyer Bush 41 stopped short of deposeing Saddam and waited for the upriseing of the people to polish him off like Mousoulini , well it seemed like a good idea at the time , but it got a lot of Shiite killed , there was a sectarian division at that time and Saddam was on the minority side but he had the better army.

Our goal in Iraq can't be to recreate the US there , there is no potential for that.

The best we can do is put the power in the hands of the people and be a good example for them , the more we micromanage them the longer we will be there.

The Iriqui Army is a new thing it has a few officers from the old corps but it is still a new thing in its coreand in its structure , they are being trained by the best that the US and UN can offer , the police also.

As the Iriqui Government grows in strength not only will they need us less , they will be more apt to contradict our instruction , but what would you rather they did?

Quote from: _JS on September 29, 2006, 04:52:30 PM

"Illegals" ... cannot get access to welfare. For that matter welfare barely exists anyway. The only such system an illegal alien can gain access to is emergency medical care.

Because we know that an illegal alien will (who broke laws to get into the country) will never break the law against using someone else's identity for getting access to welfare, huh? After all, there are just some laws they won't break?

I wonder if it has occurred to anyone, that the outbreaks of infection in our food supply might be caused by the immense uncontrolled immigration taking place. For decades, there have been running jokes about dysentery, not drinking the water, and a whole collection of other ills associated with Mexico. In truth, whatever substance these old stories and jokes may have, when you permit huge numbers of people in, from what is essentially a third world country, you also invite in their diseases, and their interpretation of hygiene and public health. I think that it is more than a coincidence that these problems started in the produce and meat industries in which illegals are so heavily represented.

Of course, it would be racist to speak of this, so nobody does. They will no more look towards illegal Mexicans as a possible source of disease, than they do towards middle easterners as a possible source of terrorism.

All of this is, of course, in addition to the huge load that illegals put on the medical and welfare systems of this country,

not to mention the extra load placed upon the prison and law enforcement resources. Why do we want to do this?

I have a high regard for the United States, and for it's culture (what's left of it),

and do not see any advantage to transforming it into a third world country, by reintroducing problems which we have already solved a century ago. Since our alleged representatives seem unwilling to deal with this problem, we may as well begin to get used to living by third world standards.

So we need to lock our doors against the increasing criminal element, not talk to the police, expect to be robbed and dominated by our government, and look forward to increasing poverty and insecurity.

We also need to remember to cook all food thoroughly, and not drink the water.

I am almost glad that the World War Two veterans are, as a generation, dying off. As much as we could use people of their mettle, I am ashamed to have them see what is being done to the country for which they sacrificed so much.

It seems that, unlike them, my generation is largely unwilling to fight for our country, or even to care for it. It may be that the old generation will be the last whole generation, outside of separate individuals, to be considered as traditionally American.

Depending upon what history you read, and what definitions you use Valens, Flavius Aetius, Jovian, and Theodosius, as well as others, have all been referred to as the Last Roman. What is interesting about this is that many of those so named lived decades, or even centuries before the official fall of Rome. Certainly, they are only the last Romans in retrospect, and did not perceive themselves as such. I wonder if the last American has been born yet, and if not, how far in the future does his birth lie?

Of interest: Of 32 emergency rooms in LA County, all but 11 seem to have closed. No private hospital can afford to have an emergency room.

But we are all politically correct. Or, we had better be, anyway!

Since the time of Saddam what freedoms were there to loose?

It's not ironic, it's just sad.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, it's not a good idea to let them decide by majority vote, but all the other ideas turned out to be worse.

Under a broad new set of laws criminalizing speech that ridicules the government or its officials, some resurrected verbatim from Saddam Hussein’s penal code, roughly a dozen Iraqi journalists have been charged with offending public officials in the past year.

Currently, three journalists for a small newspaper in southeastern Iraq are being tried here for articles last year that accused a provincial governor, local judges and police officials of corruption. The journalists are accused of violating Paragraph 226 of the penal code, which makes anyone who “publicly insults” the government or public officials subject to up to seven years in prison.

On Sept. 7, the police sealed the offices of Al Arabiya, a Dubai-based satellite news channel, for what the government said was inflammatory reporting. And the Committee to Protect Journalists says that at least three Iraqi journalists have served time in prison for writing articles deemed criminally offensive.

The office of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki has lately refused to speak with news organizations that report on sectarian violence in ways that the government considers inflammatory; some outlets have been shut down.

In addition to coping with government pressures, dozens of Iraqi journalists have been kidnapped by criminal gangs or detained by the American military, on suspicion that they are helping Sunni insurgents or Shiite militias. One, Bilal Hussein, who photographed insurgents in Anbar Province for The Associated Press, has been in American custody without charges since April.

At Al Arabiya, the Baghdad station shuttered by the Iraqi authorities earlier this month, the studio door handle is sealed in red wax and bound in police tape. (The door is adorned with a photo of Atwar Bahjat, who was kidnapped, tortured and killed in Samarra in February while reporting on the bombing of a Shiite shrine.)

Some news executives express support for Al Arabiya’s closing.

“It is the right of the Iraqi government, as it combats terrorism, to silence any voice that tries to harm the national unity,” said Mr. Sadr, of the Iraqi Media Network.