Hmmm , stop rubbing the shotgun with the american flag and turn down the Dukes of hazard for a moment. " without our funding of your preciuos U.N." hey bro hate to break the news to ya , but we dont fund the U.N. matter of fact several of the U.N.s members have a much better economy then we do. Just look at the value of the U.S. doller compaired to the rest of the wrolds currency. Dont get me wronge i love this country. i love it so much that watching it go to hell in a hand basket brings me to the point of absolute rage. But their is only so much one man can do ( with out being called a terroist under the patriot act ). I only hope that something will snap the ingorance out of this country and get the people to see that what our goverment is now and what is was ment to be by the rules set forth by our forefathers are the complete opposit. The people that serve in politics view themselfs as better then the normal citizens they view themselfs to be royalty. Washington i beleave it was did not want to take money for serving in public office, he viewed any money given to someone serveing in politics was opening the door for curruption. You think the several millions dollers given to people running for public office comes with no strings attached ? Do i support our troops ? Your damn right i do , i support anyone who puts themselfs in a position to defend other peoples freedom even if it means their own life. But it doesnt mean i support the crooked goverment that uses those brave men and women for their own personal goals or agenda.
For those who support the war on terror
- Thread starter iblazethatkush
- Start date
Hmmm , stop rubbing the shotgun with the american flag and turn down the Dukes of hazard for a moment. " without our funding of your preciuos U.N." hey bro hate to break the news to ya , but we dont fund the U.N. matter of fact several of the U.N.s members have a much better economy then we do. Just look at the value of the U.S. doller compaired to the rest of the wrolds currency. Dont get me wronge i love this country. i love it so much that watching it go to hell in a hand basket brings me to the point of absolute rage. But their is only so much one man can do ( with out being called a terroist under the patriot act ). I only hope that something will snap the ingorance out of this country and get the people to see that what our goverment is now and what is was ment to be by the rules set forth by our forefathers are the complete opposit. The people that serve in politics view themselfs as better then the normal citizens they view themselfs to be royalty. Washington i beleave it was did not want to take money for serving in public office, he viewed any money given to someone serveing in politics was opening the door for curruption. You think the several millions dollers given to people running for public office comes with no strings attached ? Do i support our troops ? Your damn right i do , i support anyone who puts themselfs in a position to defend other peoples freedom even if it means their own life. But it doesnt mean i support the crooked goverment that uses those brave men and women for their own personal goals or agenda.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
From Buba...
"matter of fact several of the U.N.s members have a much better economy then we do."
Care to name these countries?
Sounds like wishful thinking on your part Buba, but it is, demonstrably, a false assertion.
Currencies relative value is not the same as productivity or wealth creation.
You love conspiracies evidently....Lone gunman???
Holy Macaroni!
"matter of fact several of the U.N.s members have a much better economy then we do."
Care to name these countries?
Sounds like wishful thinking on your part Buba, but it is, demonstrably, a false assertion.
Currencies relative value is not the same as productivity or wealth creation.
You love conspiracies evidently....Lone gunman???
Holy Macaroni!
Well for starters England , Japan , China and the Euro has pretty much stabalized eruope as a whole makeing the euro worth almost twice as much as the doller. and ask for your " productivity or wealth creation " productivity , meaning we pruduce something ? kinda hard to produce something when more and more jobs are being sent over sea's to places like india , where buisness can pay less then one fourth the minimum wage of the United States to thier workers. And ask for wealth creation ... if we got that why is the national defiset soreing ? because we just shit'n money all over the place ? wow look at the wealth just come poreing in. Last but not least , currencies relative values are direct refections of that countrys economy, scence thats where its value is based off of. Big Buisness is makeing billions , we as a country are not.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Well for starters England , Japan , China....
Wrong.
Go ahead and look it up.
The US is THE most productive economy in the world.
Seems like you are fabricating a reality to suit your pessimistic sensibilities.
You are focusing on the euro vs dollar, and you cannot see the forest for the trees.....because you said....
"U.N.s members have a much better economy then we do."
Incorrect.
Wrong.
Go ahead and look it up.
The US is THE most productive economy in the world.
Seems like you are fabricating a reality to suit your pessimistic sensibilities.
You are focusing on the euro vs dollar, and you cannot see the forest for the trees.....because you said....
"U.N.s members have a much better economy then we do."
Incorrect.
Yea that is an incorrect statement Buba. I do not doubt that there are other successful economies and several growing much faster than ours, but we already underwent our Industrial Revolution. UN funding is dictated by two types of contributions, assessed and voluntary. Assessed contributions are calculated by a complex formula and involve population and GDP (pretty safe to say the US is the biggest contributor).
you probabaly read something along these lines right ..
updated 10:45 a.m. MT, Mon., Sept. 3, 2007
GENEVA - American workers stay longer in the office, at the factory or on the farm than their counterparts in Europe and most other rich nations, and they produce more per person over the year.
They also get more done per hour than everyone but the Norwegians, according to a U.N. report released Monday, which said the United States “leads the world in labor productivity.”
The average U.S. worker produces $63,885 of wealth per year, more than their counterparts in all other countries, the International Labor Organization said in its report. Ireland comes in second at $55,986, followed by Luxembourg at $55,641, Belgium at $55,235 and France at $54,609.
Alright according to that study and afew others america has the best economy in the world , well when they did thier study anyway.
But chew on this
Personal income is a measure utilized by the United States government, particularly the Department of Commerce, to determine the income of individuals. It is most often only applied to those who are either above the age of 15, 18, or 25 and are considered to be members of the labor force. The personal income figures of individuals in the United States are dependent on age, sex, race and educational characteristics. In 2005 roughly half of all those with graduate degrees were among the nation's top 15% of income earners. Among different demographics (sex, marital status, race, gender) for those over the age of 18, median personal income ranged from $3,317 for an unemployed, married Asian American female[2] to $55,935 for a full-time, year-round employed Asian American male.[3] According to the US Census Bureau, men tended to have higher income than women while Asians and Whites earned more than African Americans and Hispanics. The overall median personal income for all individuals over the age of 18 was $25,149[4] ($32,140 for those age 25 or above) in the year 2005.[5] If all races, employment status and other demographic characteristics are disregarded the overall median income for all 233 million persons over the age of 15 was $28,567.[6]
The national average for cost of liveing In 2005 was $65,743.
The Top Ten Reasons Why the US Economy Will Collapse:
(And by collapse, we mean go into a serious depression.)
#1. The United States government is currently running a budget deficit of $1.8 billion/day. Too much deficit will create a weaker American dollar and cripple the US economy.
#2. The US National Debt is $8 trillion+. It has to be paid back eventually by raising taxes.
#3. Oil prices is $60+ per crude barrel, there is a shortage of oil refineries and demand is growing due to more SUVs/trucks.
#4. China's economy is now bigger than the United States and China is now the centre of the global economy.
#5. China's trade exports out-matches the United States (ie. they can build cars/trucks/SUVs for half the price).
#6. English is no longer the international business language. Mandarin Chinese is now more important.
#7. Global warming is causing the US Wheat Belt to turn into desert.
#8. US universities aren't creating enough graduates to compete on the global market. Tuition is too expensive and there isn't enough university professors.
#9. The babyboomers are retiring, creating a shortage of skilled workers.
#10.Automobile companies keep laying off unionized workers and moving their factories to China. The only car company building new plants and hiring workers is Japanese car-maker Toyota (which only hires non-union workers).
More Reasons Why the US Economy Will Collapse:
The US government sold off its oil/gasoline reserves in 2002. It no longer has oil reserves in case of a national shortage.
American taxpayers have an average of $48,000 in debt due to credit cards, mortgages, university debts, etc. If the economy goes sour and they lose their jobs, they may have to declare bankruptcy.
The US dollar is notoriously easy to make counterfeit bills of. Its value of the US dollar is growing steadily lower. Thanks to modern computer printers, counterfeit is very easy to make.
The US economy still has not recovered from 9/11.
The US economy relies on the consumption of goods at a decadent rate. If something happens that throws the economy for a loop, it can very easily fall into a depression.
The US capitalist systems assumes that the United States is at the top of the global economy. It no longer is. China is at the top.
Over 60% of Americans are overweight and/or obese. The health problems resulting from their unhealthy diets combined with a shortage of doctors is causing the US healthcare system to collapse.
The US government can't afford to pay for its soldiers serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea... as a result, they are scaling back pay, pension and benefits for their soldiers. Injured soldiers have a crippling effect on the US economy and drain precious money from US coffers and families of the soldiers suffer economic consequences because they have to pay the hospital bills.
Foreign investors are no longer investing in American companies. They are investing in Chinese companies.
But your right its my made up world ... U.S.A.'s #1.
"The consequences for the US economy of doing nothing could be severe." - Alan Greenspan. "The world is set to jump off the top of a waterfall without knowing how deep the water is below." - Kenneth Rogoff, IMF (International Monetary Fund) Head of Economic Research.
"There's a 75% chance that the US will experience a currency crisis within five years." - Paul Volcker, Chairman of the US Federal Reserve. "There's nobody home on economic policy in America right now. Its an accident waiting to happen." - Stephen Roach, Chief Economist, Morgan Stanley
And scence you wanted to get in the mix i got something for you also.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Published on Thursday, August 10, 2006 by the Inter Press Service [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]U.S. Gets as Much as it Gives to the U.N. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]by Thalif Deen[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]UNITED NATIONS - The United States, which pays 22 percent of the U.N.'s regular annual budget of 1.8 billion dollars, has arrogantly demanded a dominant voice in management and administration -- primarily because it is the biggest single financial contributor to the world body. "U.N. member states, and particularly its largest contributors, want to know if they are getting the most value for the dollars they contribute," says Mark P. Lagon, the U.S. deputy assistant secretary for international organisation affairs. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]U.S. Gets as Much as it Gives to the U.N. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]by Thalif Deen[/FONT]
"People who look to the United Nations for help want to know that, too," he told the Committee on International Relations of the U.S. House of Representatives early this year.
But what he failed to tell the committee is what the United States, in turn, extracts from the United Nations -- financially and politically.
According to the latest figures released by the U.N., the United States has consistently held the number one spot in grabbing U.N. procurement contracts, averaging over 22.5 percent of all U.N. purchases annually.
"On a cost-benefit ratio, the United States gets as much -- or even more -- than what it gives to the United Nations, "says one senior U.N. official who deals with procurement.
In 2002, the United States received 24 percent (194.3 million dollars) of all U.N. contracts, which totaled 812.6 million dollars. In 2003, the corresponding figures were 21.8 percent (194.5 million dollars) out of a total of 891.8 million dollars.
In 2004, the United States took in 24.1 percent (315.8 million dollars) of all U.N. contracts, amounting to a total of 1.3 billion dollars. In 2005, the percentage was 20.4 percent (331.0 million dollars) out of total U.N. purchases of 1.6 billion dollars.. Trailing far behind in second place is Russia, whose contracts were well below the United States: 13.3 percent in 2002 (108.2 million dollars); 10.1 percent in 2003 (90.3 million dollars); 10.7 percent in 2004 (139.9 million dollars) and 7.7 percent in 2005 (125 million dollars).
And Russia pays only 1.1 percent of the U.N.'s regular budget compared with the 22 percent paid by the United States.
The scale of assessments for each of the 192 member states is determined every three years on the basis of "capacity to pay" -- including gross national product.
Ranking behind the United States in budgetary payments are Japan (19.5 percent of the U.N.'s regular budget), Germany (8.6 percent), Britain (6.1 percent), France (6.0 percent) and Italy (4.8 percent). The 25-member European Union, on the other hand, claims it is the largest contributor because collectively it accounts for 37 percent of the budget.
The U.N.'s purchases were primarily for peacekeeping activities, including air transportation services, food rations and catering, chemical and petroleum products, freight forwarding and delivery, motor vehicles and transportation equipment and telecommunications equipment and services.
Besides the U.N. Secretariat, New York City also hosts several U.N. agencies, including the U.N. Development Programme (UNDP), the U.N.'s children agency UNICEF and the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA).
According to former New York city Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the United Nations and its agencies (along with the huge diplomatic corps) contributed about 3.2 billion dollars annually to the city's economy in the late 1990s. The figure may be considerably higher now. Still, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton says there are U.S. Congressional concerns that "the United States doesn't get value for (its) money."
Norman Solomon, executive director of the Washington-based Institute for Public Accuracy, says that it is worse than unseemly for the U.S. government to complain about the number of dollars that it sends to the United Nations in view of the fact that the United States is such a rich country and Washington has been doing so much to undermine the U.N. Charter.
The U.S. government's share of the U.N. financial burden is a tiny fraction of Washington's military expenditures -- more than half a trillion dollars per year, he said.
"What the United States spent to violate the U.N. Charter with the invasion of Iraq could have funded the entire budget of the United Nations for decades," Solomon told IPS.
"When Bolton complains about all that Uncle Sam is doing for the United Nations, he sounds like a lawyer for gangsters who turn streets into horrible scenes of carnage and then quibble over the size of invoices submitted by morticians," said Solomon, author of "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death" (John Wiley & Sons, 2005).
Last month, one right-wing New York newspaper made the outrageous comment that "Tinpot rulers milk the U.N.-- which gets 22 percent of its money from America -- which they pocket."
The editorial also said that U.N. diplomats pretend to be VIPs, with plum assignments in New York "which they envy and enjoy, even as they bash American capitalism and culture."
James A. Paul, executive director of New York-based Global Policy Forum, said Washington today has a very narrow sense of what value for money means.
"To them it evidently means 'agree with us on all things'. It's not about a utilitarian calculus, a cost-benefit analysis, a sense of a fair exchange. It is a despotic calculus based on subservience," he added.
"One might also consider the cost to the United States if it had to do some of the things the United Nations does (including peacekeeping). There are so many ways of understanding the economics of the United Nations, and why it is a bargain (for the United States," Paul argued.
Solomon of the Institute for Public Accuracy noted that the United States leads the world in the international arms trade, and in the process undermines U.N. efforts to implement programmes for peace, security and public health. This form of global leadership does incalculable damage to the humanitarian mission of the United Nations, he said.
At a political level, Solomon said, the advantages of having the United Nations headquartered in the United States include the fact that this makes it so easy for Washington to eavesdrop on U.N. diplomats in violation of the Headquarters Agreement for the United Nations, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.
In early March 2003, journalists at the London-based Observer reported that the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) was secretly participating in the U.S. government's high-pressure campaign for the U.N. Security Council to approve a resolution in favour of invading Iraq, Solomon said.
The newspaper exposed an NSA memo, dated Jan. 31, 2003, that outlined the wide scope of the surveillance activities; the memo said that the NSA was seeking any information useful to push a war resolution through the Security Council -- the whole gamut of information that could give U.S. policymakers an edge in obtaining results favourable to U.S. goals or to head off surprises.
For such improper and illegal spying activities directed from Washington, it is very convenient to have the U.N. headquarters located in New York City, he noted.
"Perhaps the U.S. government should be assessed a special user fee in recognition of this convenience," Solomon added.
[/FONT]
ccodiane
New Member
Read 'em and weep BS. Over twice the contibutions of the nearest contributor, and from your precious Attorney General of the UN. I know this won't phase your feeble attempts to persuade, but it sure shows what a loon you are. Oh, and I prefer a rifle or bow to a shotgun, although firepower is firepower, and its all good.
A UNA-USA Advocacy Agenda 2006 Fact Sheet
The Bush administrations fiscal year 2007 budget request contains $1.26 billion to finance the United States assessed share of mandatory dues to 47 international organizations, including the UN and its specialized agencies.
The Administrations FY07 request also includes $289 million for voluntary contributions to UN programs and other multilateral organizations, including the following: $300 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; $123 million for the UN Childrens Fund (UNICEF); $94.5 million for the UN Development Program (UNDP); and $10 million for the UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF).
[FONT="]Secretary-General's Note [/FONT]
US
Japan
UK
Germany
Netherlands
Italy
Norway
France
Sweden
Canada
Explanatory Notes: 1. 2. 3.
Resolution A/60/180 requests the Secretary General to compile a list of the top ten providers of assessed and voluntary financial contributions to the United Nations, based on the average annual contributions in the previous three calendar years. Following the circulation of an initial list on 13 January, the President of the General Assembly requested the Secretariat to supplement this list with additional data in order to provide a more comprehensive picture on financial contributions to the UN.
The above summary is based on 28 different data streams from a total of 22 UN entities and includes the following categories: UN Budget, UN General Funds, FAO, ILO, WHO, UNESCO, UNDP, UNDP administered (UNV, UNCDF, UNIFEM), UN-HABITAT, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, UNFPA, UNRWA, UNAIDS, IFAD, UNODC, IAEA, UNIDO and WMO. This list reflects virtually all significant financial contributions to the UN, amounting to more than US$ 33 billion for the ten top contributors over the three year period. A few smaller agencies and Trust Funds administered in the field could not be included, given the limited time and data availability. A gap of US$ 650 m separates the 11th largest donor from the 10th largest. As provided for in resolution A/60/180, any contributions received towards the Peacebuilding Fund as of 1 February 2006, have been included.
It is recognized that contributions from the European Community constitute a significant source of financial support to the United Nations. The following figures provide an indication for the level of funding received from the European Community, in addition to the direct contributions from its member countries: US$ 457m in 2002; US$ 572m in 2003 and US$ 822m in 2004.
1 February 2006
A UNA-USA Advocacy Agenda 2006 Fact Sheet
The Bush administrations fiscal year 2007 budget request contains $1.26 billion to finance the United States assessed share of mandatory dues to 47 international organizations, including the UN and its specialized agencies.
The Administrations FY07 request also includes $289 million for voluntary contributions to UN programs and other multilateral organizations, including the following: $300 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; $123 million for the UN Childrens Fund (UNICEF); $94.5 million for the UN Development Program (UNDP); and $10 million for the UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF).
[FONT="]Secretary-General's Note [/FONT]
[FONT="]Top Ten Providers of Assessed Contributions to United Nations Budgets and of Voluntary Contributions to United Nations Funds, Programmes and Agencies[/FONT][FONT="], [/FONT][FONT="]including the standing Peacebuilding Fund [/FONT]
[FONT="]3 year total [/FONT]
[FONT="]average[/FONT]
[FONT="]2004[/FONT]
[FONT="]2003 [/FONT]
[FONT="]2002 [/FONT]
1
11,398,068,755
3,799,356,252
4,227,135,223
3,955,255,610
3,215,677,922
2
5,446,093,994
1,815,364,665
1,853,003,700
1,897,577,533
1,695,512,762
3
3,438,243,909
1,146,081,303
1,432,995,162
1,165,535,746
839,713,001
4
2,385,870,903
795,290,301
921,302,377
742,676,715
721,891,811
5
2,238,024,996
746,008,332
888,452,772
708,329,199
641,243,025
6
1,839,285,165
613,095,055
694,425,775
634,591,700
510,267,690
7
1,775,543,922
591,847,974
659,404,140
630,764,396
485,375,386
8
1,698,551,891
566,183,964
644,471,409
477,039,715
577,040,768
9
1,648,155,264
549,385,088
692,951,315
571,305,208
383,898,741
10
1,609,678,170
536,559,390
688,419,581
562,344,746
358,913,843
Explanatory Notes: 1. 2. 3.
Resolution A/60/180 requests the Secretary General to compile a list of the top ten providers of assessed and voluntary financial contributions to the United Nations, based on the average annual contributions in the previous three calendar years. Following the circulation of an initial list on 13 January, the President of the General Assembly requested the Secretariat to supplement this list with additional data in order to provide a more comprehensive picture on financial contributions to the UN.
The above summary is based on 28 different data streams from a total of 22 UN entities and includes the following categories: UN Budget, UN General Funds, FAO, ILO, WHO, UNESCO, UNDP, UNDP administered (UNV, UNCDF, UNIFEM), UN-HABITAT, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, UNFPA, UNRWA, UNAIDS, IFAD, UNODC, IAEA, UNIDO and WMO. This list reflects virtually all significant financial contributions to the UN, amounting to more than US$ 33 billion for the ten top contributors over the three year period. A few smaller agencies and Trust Funds administered in the field could not be included, given the limited time and data availability. A gap of US$ 650 m separates the 11th largest donor from the 10th largest. As provided for in resolution A/60/180, any contributions received towards the Peacebuilding Fund as of 1 February 2006, have been included.
It is recognized that contributions from the European Community constitute a significant source of financial support to the United Nations. The following figures provide an indication for the level of funding received from the European Community, in addition to the direct contributions from its member countries: US$ 457m in 2002; US$ 572m in 2003 and US$ 822m in 2004.
1 February 2006
ccodiane
New Member
And in the top 4? Japan and Germany? How the hell could this have happened? Didn't we kick their asses and leave them in the scrapheap of history? Or did our intervention in the war, the second world one you knumbskull, advance their opportunities for prosperity? I would't be surprised to see Iraq overtake the Europeans in contributions in twenty years, god forbid the UN-osaur is still alive!
iblazethatkush
Well-Known Member
Wow your a fucking nutjob.
iblazethatkush
Well-Known Member
LoL Yes, very much so.
iblazethatkush
Well-Known Member
I would like to think I'm faily intelligent. But, we're good, you gave me support on one of my other threads. I think we should just agree to disagree on the politcos.
justin2937
Well-Known Member
Take a look at this map of Japan during the war. It was MUCH more than a "fucking island" that we could carpet bomb.
That was in 1942, I found another map of Japanese occupied territory at this link Rise and Fall of Japan
It's not as pretty, but still shows that Japan was in control of a lot of islands. That map shows the significant amount of fighting that would had to have been done. Those nukes saved lives, PERIOD.
So far sounds right. A homemaker makes almost nothing (god damn though, 3grande a year to stay at home and watch TV? I'm in). And mid-50's for someone who works full-time year round. Definitely sounds right.
Here's where you lose it. I can see EXACTLY what they did to get these numbers, they fudge them. A good statistician can make the numbers say whatever they want them to. Hence, the inclusion of <b>15 year olds</b> in this survey. What better way to lower the apparent income level than to include a segment of the population almost gaurenteed to have either no income, or very little income. You're telling me a huge segment of 15-22 year olds are working full time? Of course not, they're in HS and college still living off their parents (not that there is anything wrong with that). But to include them in the study population is careless and does not paint a clear picture of reality. The median income for someone between 25 and 64 who works full-time is $39,000. That ain't bad at all.
Forgot to mention the average number of income earners per household. Turns out, 42% have 2 income earners. Even so, it puts your over-boated cost of living figure easily within grasp, considering the average household has 2.6 people living in it.
What other military can they use? Should we not benefit the most, I mean, its our blood. The blood of an American citizen is priceless compared to that of any other citizen (or at least that should be the US gov.'s view). We damn well better be getting a bigger fuckin pot.
And finally, I'm tired....
Household income in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Standard of living in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
justin2937
Well-Known Member
Forgot to post these two quotes of Gandhi's I found on wikipedia:
The German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone. And he is doing it with religious zeal. For he is propounding a new religion of exclusive and militant nationalism in the name of which any inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter. The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid youth is being visited upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon or province. But if there can be no war against Germany, even for such a crime as is being committed against the Jews, surely there can be no alliance with Germany. How can there be alliance between a nation which claims to stand for justice and democracy and one which is the declared enemy of both?"[64] [65]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***************************************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I were a Jew and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest Gentile German might, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon; I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. And for doing this I should not wait for the fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance, but would have confidence that in the end the rest were bound to follow my example. If one Jew or all the Jews were to accept the prescription here offered, he or they cannot be worse off than now. And suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and joy [...] the calculated violence of Hitler may even result in a general massacre of the Jews by way of his first answer to the declaration of such hostilities. But if the Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary suffering, even the massacre I have imagined could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy that Jehovah had wrought deliverance of the race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the God-fearing, death has no terror.[66]
Definitely don't think we should be looking to Gandhi for advice on how to deal with irrationally thinking people.
The German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone. And he is doing it with religious zeal. For he is propounding a new religion of exclusive and militant nationalism in the name of which any inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter. The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid youth is being visited upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon or province. But if there can be no war against Germany, even for such a crime as is being committed against the Jews, surely there can be no alliance with Germany. How can there be alliance between a nation which claims to stand for justice and democracy and one which is the declared enemy of both?"[64] [65]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***************************************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I were a Jew and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest Gentile German might, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon; I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. And for doing this I should not wait for the fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance, but would have confidence that in the end the rest were bound to follow my example. If one Jew or all the Jews were to accept the prescription here offered, he or they cannot be worse off than now. And suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and joy [...] the calculated violence of Hitler may even result in a general massacre of the Jews by way of his first answer to the declaration of such hostilities. But if the Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary suffering, even the massacre I have imagined could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy that Jehovah had wrought deliverance of the race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the God-fearing, death has no terror.[66]
Definitely don't think we should be looking to Gandhi for advice on how to deal with irrationally thinking people.
Thats a map of 1942 , when america entered the war. heres one of when we nuked japan.
Lets not foget now that we controlled the sea's , that japans navy at the time of the bomb's being dropped was almost nonexsistant. lets also not forget that Russian troops had moved into manchuria, chines and american forces were pushing for Hong Kong and australian and british forces were in thailand. you keep talking bout saveing lives and disregaurding the several thousand people we killed. Dont forget that almost 40% of u.s. deaths in the pacific where non combat related, they died from malaria and other illnesses because we couldn't get them the medican they needed.
Lets not foget now that we controlled the sea's , that japans navy at the time of the bomb's being dropped was almost nonexsistant. lets also not forget that Russian troops had moved into manchuria, chines and american forces were pushing for Hong Kong and australian and british forces were in thailand. you keep talking bout saveing lives and disregaurding the several thousand people we killed. Dont forget that almost 40% of u.s. deaths in the pacific where non combat related, they died from malaria and other illnesses because we couldn't get them the medican they needed.
In reguards to the national income/cost of liveing numbers. yes in 2005 two incomes would of put you just over the cost of liveing. But cost of liveing does not inclued personal debt. and scence most americans have more debt then they have saveings it would be safe to say that barely meeting the national cost of liveing with two incomes does nothing to get you out of the amount of debt's being aquired. Also the numbers where for 2005 and scence then cost of liveing in the united states has gone up and the average income has gone down, the situation is worse. Dont forget that most persons liveing and working in the united states are not collage grad's , they are not in the higher income scales. The state that i live in as of today the average annual income is $ 28,194 yet the average cost of liveing for one person is $34,868 and i can tell ya , in my city as well as most city's in the U.S., people are not makeing what the average annula income is, most people make well below that.
And ask for your rebuttle about the U.N. you apperntly missed the part that most of the U.N.'s budget goes to NONCOMBAT issues and instead to humanitarian efforts. sorry but dont see too much "priceless " u.s. blood being spilt in delivering food.
And ask for your rebuttle about the U.N. you apperntly missed the part that most of the U.N.'s budget goes to NONCOMBAT issues and instead to humanitarian efforts. sorry but dont see too much "priceless " u.s. blood being spilt in delivering food.
Dept doesnt always come from not useing credit cards wisely, most medical insurance doesnt cover the intire cost of seeing the doctor, leaveing you to cover the expence and thats if you lucky enough to have some type of heath care. Damages to your car also add dept, most car insurance companys dont cover the entire cost of repairing your auto.Not to mention student loans. Dont just assume people have debt because they dont know how to manage money.