Saddam Sentenced to Death - Page 8 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

doniston · #**106** (**permalink**) 11-14-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronMaiden27

Dude, the Repulican party failed as soon as we started losing our grasp on the war, which was years ago and ignored so many important issues over here, leaving us over our heads in shit in both countries.

So you would rather put pride of victory per the cost of soldiers' lives because you don't want the US to be an embarassment to the world? You want soldiers to stay there (and continue to die as a result) until the job is done because you don't want the whole effort and lives lost from this war to go to waste? Didn't we learn our lessons from Nam? I guess not. There can never be peace until pride is put aside and we learn to take our loses. Pride shouldn't override the price of life, if a loss is at stake.

You're a woman so what do you know------

OK, I guess I must be a woman too, (I haven't looked lately

)---cause I agree with you

Marcus1124 · #**107** (**permalink**) 11-15-2006

Quote:

danielpalos
How would he perform his community service after he is dead? We have actual, and pressing, concerns in that continent that could be dealt with by a person with that experience. Promoting the general welfare in Africa could result in lower levels of migration to the first world.

There is no greater community service Saddam Hussien could serve than to be on world-wide television being hung by those he oppressed as a message to all other oppressors.

danielpalos · #**108** (**permalink**) 11-15-2006

By what moral or ethical standard do you make that claim? I have already presented a much more ethical and moral standard.

kinetic · #**109** (**permalink**) 11-15-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy1382

As I said, the Saudi's support terrorism yes, I will not say whether or not another country should go to war.

I have never denied that the Saudis are up to their eyeballs in Terrorism.

The point that I was making is that there are few solutions besides war for Sates of Terror like Iran, Iraq, Syria, etc. Saddam Hussein was involved heavily in Terrorism but I'm not so sure that the Saudi Government is involved with Terrorism was also my point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy1382

Liberalism is in support of the free market and capitalism, Socialism is not. Liberalism is for representative government. Liberalism is for government protection of individual rights (should they be infringed on). Liberalism is also for no class system.

You have spelled out the classic definition and not the currently bastardized definition which is almost synonymous with Socialism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy1382

Communism does not favor the free market, nor a system with no classes, nor the rights of the individual. (Although socialism to a lesser extent)

Socialism is the thought of common ownership of everything, free-market rules are far less, and the individual means less as well, there is also a class system to a lesser extent than that of communism.

Socialism is the goal of the China's Constitution as they are lead by the Communist Party. Socialism and Communism go hand in hand.

Quote:

CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
(Adopted on December 4, 1982)

Both the victory of China's new-democratic revolution and the successes of its socialist cause have been achieved by the Chinese people of all nationalities under the leadership of the Communist Party of China and the guidance of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought, and by upholding truth, correcting errors and overcoming numerous difficulties and hardships.

Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China and the guidance of Marxism- Leninism and Mao ZedongThought, the Chinese people of all nationalities will continue to adhere to the people's democratic dictatorship and follow the socialist road.