[quote]hspder wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
In Dutch we have a saying that you shouldn’t sell the skin of the bear befroe you’ve shot him.
Actually, that’s pretty specific to Vlaanderen, I’m pretty sure that if you used that saying in, say, Noord Holland, people would look at you funny. Especially since you would say it with a Vlaamse accent.
By the way, I’m making fun of the Randstad snobs, not you. It’s pretty sad how xenophobic they’ve become in the last half a decade or so.
[/quote]
So, you’ve been in Belgium and the Netherlands then eh?
When was that?
Also, I’m thinking of contributing my small effort to the arms race by buying one of these.
[quote]hspder wrote:
Have you been to the “inner” China? From that comment, I’m pretty sure you haven’t.
There are already about 4 billion starving civilians in China – adding the 23 million starving North Koreans would be a drop of water in the ocean. Plus it’s not like the Chinese see the North Koreans as being human. Yes, that might sound shocking to you, but I’ve had a few Chinese people admit as much. [/quote]
Uhhh, prof? I hate to burst your bubble, but there are only 1.6 billion Chinese people IN CHINA TOTAL. Maybe there are 4 million going hungry, but I HAVE BEEN to “inner China” (in fact I lived there for a YEAR), and saw very few TRULY hungry people. Sure, I saw some poverty, some backward farming techniques, some filth, some decay, but it wasn’t like you’re describing. It’s not like N.Korea. It’s not like Sudan. You hardly ever even see anyone in China BEG. China is NOT your standard third world country anymore, dude.
I would also encourage you not to think that the few Chinese people in the Bay Area whom you consulted are an accurate representation of what the majority of Chinese believe. There’s a REASON they expatriated.
[quote]Wreckless wrote:
So, you’ve been in Belgium and the Netherlands then eh?
When was that?[/quote]
Well, you can say I’ve been, yes.
I lived in NL (actually, in Leiden) for about 4 years at the turn of the century. I had been there before, for shorter periods, for either random work or vacations. It’s pretty easy to get there from SFO and Schiphol is a great airport… I have a few friends down in Eindhoven (they work for the TUE) and we went to Antwerp every now and then to the Malls (they actually have real US-style malls there, contrary to NL. I would NEVER had guessed in my life I would miss US-style Shopping Malls, but it did… especially with such unbearably bad weather). I also have a couple of friends in Brussels (they’re actually from Portugal) which I visited every now and then.
And yes, I speak Dutch. My wife does too. I taught Dutch Graduate students in English, but my wife actually had to write white papers and reports in Dutch… Not an easy language to learn, by the way.
[quote]Wreckless wrote:
Also, I’m thinking of contributing my small effort to the arms race by buying one of these.
Yeah, we’re building an array of these for the next time Bush tries to come to the Hoover Institution. Last time we just managed to stop him from getting there(he actually had to have the meeting off-campus), but next time… we need to kick it up another notch!
[quote]knewsom wrote:
Uhhh, prof? I hate to burst your bubble, but there are only 1.6 billion Chinese people IN CHINA TOTAL.[/quote]
I definitely need to attend that “how to convey humor in an Internet Post” seminar Stanford Continuing Studies has. Either that or I need to stop trying to be humorous. Either way I clearly suck at it.
Yes, I was exaggerating by at least an order of magnitude, mainly because, obviously, I do not know the exact number. I thought saying an absurdly high number would be funnier than saying “X” or “plenty” or “a lot”, but I failed. For that I am sorry.
[quote]knewsom wrote:
Maybe there are 4 million going hungry, but I HAVE BEEN to “inner China” (in fact I lived there for a YEAR), and saw very few TRULY hungry people. [/quote]
Well, I’ve been to inner China too, and I have a much worse impression than what you are describing. It’s a big country… I guess it’s normal we have different impressions.
Either way, I’m pretty sure neither of us has actually been to N.Korea, and have no idea what the exact numbers are, so we’re all just conjecturing here anyway.
And please, let’s move to something we agree on. We need to win those November elections, and apparently that requires us to pretend we agree on everything, so let’s talk about… raising taxes! Yeah! Oh, wait…
[quote]hspder wrote:
I definitely need to attend that “how to convey humor in an Internet Post” seminar Stanford Continuing Studies has. Either that or I need to stop trying to be humorous. Either way I clearly suck at it.
Yes, I was exaggerating by at least an order of magnitude, mainly because, obviously, I do not know the exact number. I thought saying an absurdly high number would be funnier than saying “X” or “plenty” or “a lot”, but I failed. For that I am sorry.[/quote]
heh, I had a hunch you were kidding there… I find that the more ludicrous (and also the more specific)the number, the funnier it is. like, “there are 482.5 trillion people starving in China”.
[quote]
Well, I’ve been to inner China too, and I have a much worse impression than what you are describing. It’s a big country… I guess it’s normal we have different impressions.
Either way, I’m pretty sure neither of us has actually been to N.Korea, and have no idea what the exact numbers are, so we’re all just conjecturing here anyway.[/quote]
ture. …although WHEN we visited China could also have an effect on what we saw. For example, I lived there 2000-2001, mostly in the Xi’An area. When were you in China? Where abouts were you?
[quote]
And please, let’s move to something we agree on. We need to win those November elections, and apparently that requires us to pretend we agree on everything, so let’s talk about… raising taxes! Yeah! Oh, wait…
;-)[/quote]
lol - right there with ya! I think that the sad thing about N.Korea is that there just ISNT a solution, at least not one that we can effect.
[quote]knewsom wrote:
heh, I had a hunch you were kidding there… I find that the more ludicrous (and also the more specific)the number, the funnier it is. like, “there are 482.5 trillion people starving in China”.[/quote]
OK, I’ll try to note that on my “Dummy’s Guide to Internet Humor” book.
[quote]knewsom wrote:
ture. …although WHEN we visited China could also have an effect on what we saw. For example, I lived there 2000-2001, mostly in the Xi’An area. When were you in China? Where abouts were you?[/quote]
It was actually there just a couple of weeks ago, doing consulting for an ERP company (which as usual is state-owned and the board is composed of some government official’s close relatives).
Their HQ is not in a major city – actually, it has basically its own town, where all the employees live (they’re borderline slave labor, but that’s another story). I do not remember the exact name of the region, but it took about 16 hours by train from Beijing.
We tried to look around as much as we could, but our hosts tried to limit our movements as much as they could without being overly rude. They could not, however, control the people on the train (nor the landscape during the trip) and my colleagues and I heard some pretty sad stories from other passengers (some of my colleagues do speak/understand Mandarin, which I’m sure doesn’t surprise you)… accompanied by some pretty shocking images in the backdrop.
[quote]steveo5801 wrote:
It is time to stop playing with these despots and it is high time to begin to take them out before they take us out![/quote]
You’ve been trying to take out dictators and other evil-doers for the past century.
Is the world free of evil yet?
When will you learn that in the process of attempting to fix the world’s problems, you create more than you could ever imagine?
If Saddam/KJI, or whomever had or has any WMD’s, the best way of making him use them against the U.S. would be to provoke him with an attack. To attack the U.S. unprovoked would be suicidal for any dictator, and none of them would ever dream of it UNLESS U.S. policy left them with no choice (case-in-point: Japan during WWII, FDR did everything he could to provoke them into bombing Pearl Harbor).
One of these days you’re going to bark up the wrong tree and get a nuke up your ass. Or quite likely a bigger, better 9/11. It’s not at all difficult to see how such an event might arise from the belligerent foreign policy you are advocating.
Nukes act as a deterrant rather than a threat on the world stage. They do for nations what guns do for individuals; they are the “great equalizers”. The only way a country is realistically going to get nuked, in this day and age, is if they ask for it. And that’s precisely what America is doing by refusing to mind its own business and trying to police the entire world. Enough is enough.
There’s no funding for missile defense because nobody in the military-industrial complex wants to see a working system developed. It would put a significant damper on the policy of preemptive warfare which is so essential to the special interests which dictate policy in this country. We could probably have a solid MDS in 5 years with private contracts and 1 year’s military funding. But I doubt it’ll happen in the next 20, for the reasons given above.
[quote]hspder wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
FDR did everything he could to provoke them into bombing Pearl Harbor).
I’d be very careful with that statement, to say the least.
I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt and letting you clarify (or retract) rather than immediately falling on you like a ton of bricks.
Tread carefully.
[/quote]
Fuck that, unload on him.
It’s that kind of “blame America for everything” bullshit that is killing the left in this country. We need a two party system. If dipshits like this are the only alternative, Republicans will never be forced to get their shit together.
Had you looked around you, you might have noticed that the US started to take out “these despots”, but it seems they are stuck at no. 1. And nobody knows why he was picked first, since there were so many other candidates.[/quote]
Yes, no shit. WMD, where are they? If they were up his ass they would know, which is where I would have hid them, if I hadn’t shipped them off to Syria.
By the way, I’m making fun of the Randstad snobs, not you. It’s pretty sad how xenophobic they’ve become in the last half a decade or so.
[/quote]
Hspder making fun of snobs.
Kinda like…
(Squelch break)
“Pot, this is Kettle, over”
(Squelch Break)
“Kettle this is Pot, go ahead, over”
(Squelch Break)
“Yeah, Pot, this is Kettle, You’re Black. Out”
[quote]doogie wrote:
It’s that kind of “blame America for everything” bullshit that is killing the left in this country.[/quote]
The reasons the left has failed to get traction in the past few years in the US are much, much more complex than that…
[quote]doogie wrote:
We need a two party system. If dipshits like this are the only alternative,[/quote]
You should know as well as I do that the positions you’re referring to are as frowned upon by the majority of liberals in this country as they are by conservatives. They are not “the only alternative”.
The fact that our fundamental principles (as liberals) of tolerance and respect prevent us from lashing out at them in a hate-filled tirade, or, even worse, simply silence them, doesn’t mean we agree.
Liberals constantly disagree on many, many issues; the fact remains that’s a fundamental part of our beliefs, and the day you see liberals agreeing on most issues is the day liberalism is dead – or at least taking a break.
I never claimed that everybody on the left side of the aisle is a rational, intelligent, thoughtful human being. On the contrary – the 90/10 rule is pretty much universal in my book, so it applies to liberals as well. And academics, by the way.
[quote]doogie wrote:
Republicans will never be forced to get their shit together. [/quote]
Now THAT’S a scary thought. Seriously. As much as I disagree with Republicans, I am rational enough to realize that the GOP getting “their shit together” would benefit everyone in this country.
Hey, as I said before, if Bush actually practiced the Gospel of Smaller Government, and actually reduced the public debt, I’d be a happy camper. My professional training compels me to adore any POTUS that actually reduces debt, remember that.
What pisses me off is that we’re basically getting the worst of both worlds: pork spending AND no decent social benefits. Argh!
[quote]hspder wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
FDR did everything he could to provoke them into bombing Pearl Harbor).
I’d be very careful with that statement, to say the least.
I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt and letting you clarify (or retract) rather than immediately falling on you like a ton of bricks.
Tread carefully.
[/quote]
That’s nice of you, I suppose. Thanks for keeping it civil. I was under the impression that what I wrote was fairly common knowledge by now, which is why I neglected to corroborate it, but I shall do so now.
I have a feeling that you and certain others of nationalist persuasion are not going to like these articles.
Search google for pearl harbor foreknowledge
Salient Excerpts:
Perhaps the single most important document discovered by Stinnett is a 7 October 1940 memorandum written by Lt. Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence. McCollum?s memo outlines a strategic policy designed to goad the Japanese into committing “an overt act of war” against the United States. McCollum writes that such a strategy is necessary because “it is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado.” McCollum suggests eight specific “actions” that the United States should take to bring about this result. The key one is “Action F” which calls for keeping “the main strength” of the U.S. Pacific Fleet “in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.” McCollum concludes his memo by stating that “if by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better.” Stinnett has little trouble demonstrating that the strategy outlined in this memo became the official policy of the Roosevelt administration. Not only was the memorandum endorsed by Capt. Dudley Knox, one of Roosevelt?s most trusted military advisers, but White House routing logs demonstrate that Roosevelt received the memorandum; and over the next year, Roosevelt put every one of the eight suggested actions into effect. He implemented the last one (Action H) on 26 July 1941 when he ordered a complete embargo of all U.S. trade with Japan.
…
[i]Things You Can’t Say in America
FDR knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor
It doesn’t matter how many times you prove it. Wait five years and you have to prove it all over again. Take Pearl Harbor. The fact that FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack is something that should by now be as solidly established in American historiography as William Randolph Hearst’s famous order to his photographer, “You furnish the pictures, I’ll furnish the war,” (the conflict under discussion being the Spanish American war).
John Flynn made a sound case for Roosevelt’s foreknowledge in 1946. Relying on public documents, the historian Charles Beard did it magisterially in 1948, with his FDR and the Coming of the War 1941. John Toland wrapped it with Infamy in the early 1980s. Robert Stinnett made the case all over again a year ago with Day of Deceit. I can guarantee to you that about five years down the road, after the National Archives have released another truckload of documents, someone will be triumphantly writing that the case has “finally been made,” and someone else will be whining that “once again the conspiracy mongers are at work.”[/i]
Whether you are willing to believe that FDR knew about the attack in advance, there is no denying that his administration pursued a hostile and antagonistic foreign policy towards Japan in the months leading up to the attack. Here is an encyclopedia page presenting both sides of the “advance warning” debate:
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
hspder wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
FDR did everything he could to provoke them into bombing Pearl Harbor).
I’d be very careful with that statement, to say the least.
I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt and letting you clarify (or retract) rather than immediately falling on you like a ton of bricks.
Tread carefully.
That’s nice of you, I suppose. Thanks for keeping it civil. I was under the impression that what I wrote was fairly common knowledge by now, which is why I neglected to corroborate it, but I shall do so now.
I have a feeling that you and certain others of nationalist persuasion are not going to like these articles.
Search google for pearl harbor foreknowledge
Salient Excerpts:
Perhaps the single most important document discovered by Stinnett is a 7 October 1940 memorandum written by Lt. Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence. McCollum?s memo outlines a strategic policy designed to goad the Japanese into committing “an overt act of war” against the United States. McCollum writes that such a strategy is necessary because “it is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado.” McCollum suggests eight specific “actions” that the United States should take to bring about this result. The key one is “Action F” which calls for keeping “the main strength” of the U.S. Pacific Fleet “in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.” McCollum concludes his memo by stating that “if by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better.” Stinnett has little trouble demonstrating that the strategy outlined in this memo became the official policy of the Roosevelt administration. Not only was the memorandum endorsed by Capt. Dudley Knox, one of Roosevelt?s most trusted military advisers, but White House routing logs demonstrate that Roosevelt received the memorandum; and over the next year, Roosevelt put every one of the eight suggested actions into effect. He implemented the last one (Action H) on 26 July 1941 when he ordered a complete embargo of all U.S. trade with Japan.
…
[i]Things You Can’t Say in America
FDR knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor
It doesn’t matter how many times you prove it. Wait five years and you have to prove it all over again. Take Pearl Harbor. The fact that FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack is something that should by now be as solidly established in American historiography as William Randolph Hearst’s famous order to his photographer, “You furnish the pictures, I’ll furnish the war,” (the conflict under discussion being the Spanish American war).
John Flynn made a sound case for Roosevelt’s foreknowledge in 1946. Relying on public documents, the historian Charles Beard did it magisterially in 1948, with his FDR and the Coming of the War 1941. John Toland wrapped it with Infamy in the early 1980s. Robert Stinnett made the case all over again a year ago with Day of Deceit. I can guarantee to you that about five years down the road, after the National Archives have released another truckload of documents, someone will be triumphantly writing that the case has “finally been made,” and someone else will be whining that “once again the conspiracy mongers are at work.”[/i]
Whether you are willing to believe that FDR knew about the attack in advance, there is no denying that his administration pursued a hostile and antagonistic foreign policy towards Japan in the months leading up to the attack. Here is an encyclopedia page presenting both sides of the “advance warning” debate:
