Acriku Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 Yep, that's why they have mass production workers for .05 an hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quoudam72 Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 VigilVirus-what progress has communism made that it achieved faster than capitalism besides the inadequacy to survive in this mordern world. This so-called progress that communism has made that you speak of who benifits from it? Earthnuker-that is what communism is a mask for dictatorships. Castro made communism work to a degree and after that he could go no futher why there is no future in communism. Communism is nothing more than vampires feeding apon the innocent. Communism holds people blinded by the illusions of it's empty promises all the while being lead to slaughter like a sheep to sacrifice by a wolf dressed as a shepard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 Lol when castro took over from Batista (wich was a murderous, evil facist dictator. Guess what: he was supported by the United States) Cuba was a dime worth farming island. Castro build schools and hospitals. Now I suppose you would like to install a guy like Batista again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quoudam72 Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 lol ;) I know about the US supporting Castro to overthrow Batista. I would not like Bastista (or the likes) to take office again. Castro could have enjoyed the rewards of living so close to the United States there some many things that he could have done with that beautiful island instead it is at a stand still what is the future of Cuba? I am sure that even Castro himself can't give you answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 The US did not support Castros uprising. They kept supporting Batista till his regime ended.Cuba isn't exactly the weatlhiest nation in the world, but consider this. When Batista was disposed, all of his rich friends who exploited the masses ran off with suitcases full of money and colonised the US. Castro did a good job, considering the circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted November 16, 2002 Author Share Posted November 16, 2002 Communism could/can work in a small society/population. Like Cuba, that I can agree on. But communsim on a global scale, well, it won't work. Cuba is small, many people know each other there. Everything works because it's a small society, and everyone can indeed agree for what's better to all of them. But communism on a global scale, no. One, if the world would be one big communism state, there wouldn't be control everywhere. Not everyone would recieve the same "reward" here in Sweden, like maybe they would in the U.K. And if every country would have invidual leaders, well, people would still complain because maybe their country don't have what another one has. One could go on forever. For now, communism is a mask of control of the population. But I agree that it is a good ideal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Cuba isn't a walk in the park though Earth. America is :) Quite a lot of parks really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordos45 Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Actualyl there is a thing known as the Platt Ammendment. Since we granted Cuba its independence, we have had that ammendment to reserve our right to interfere in their affairs, and for the price of independence they agreed to it. For all of you who may think that the US embargo on Cuba is so horrible, consider this:We still rent an area of Cuba at the cost of millions of dollars a year to maintain a naval base there! That's right, the US government has an embargo on Cuba, but the US government pays the Cuban government for the usage of Cuban land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 So, that's suppose to justify the strangling policy of the embargo?I already knew about the US base on Cuba. They moved a lot of Al Quada soldiers there for detainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ethan Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 um, excuse me, but what happened friday? i was out of town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted November 17, 2002 Author Share Posted November 17, 2002 Friday was the last day Saddam Hussein could say "yes" or "no" to the UN Weapons Inspectors to return and search for WoMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction). Seems like he has accepted and so Hans Blix and Co. goes back to Iraq for the search of the weapons. Too bad our parallell universe-friends got war :P... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ethan Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 good. i doubt they'll find anything. they had a week to hide it or build a new house or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted November 17, 2002 Author Share Posted November 17, 2002 Since the very first warning, about a month ago, they've had pretty much time hiding their weapons, or shipping them to other countries, loyal to Iraq. They knew sooner or later, the inspectors would return, no matter what they did. And they didn't want to have another war they knew they could not win. Pretty logical :P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilVirus Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Since the very first warning, about a month ago, they've had pretty much time hiding their weapons, or shipping them to other countries, loyal to Iraq. They knew sooner or later, the inspectors would return, no matter what they did. And they didn't want to have another war they knew they could not win. Pretty logical :P. US probably knows that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undsputed Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 OOh..let me join in late. First off, that thing about Russia in WW2 is interesting. Russia may have lost the most people but that doesn't mean they are the reason the war was "won." Maybe they just fought poorly.....or perhaps those body counts include troops who WERE SHOT BY THE RUSSIANS THEMSELVES. Maybe those counts include civilians who were killed by Stalin to push the war machine (which numbers in the millions).And then there was the fact that there was a whole different front on which the Germans were also fighting. It involved several countries attacking them from the West.Then there is always what Russian did after war...you know, keeping their share of countries as a sort of reward...like half of Germany.Secondly, the Korean War in my opinion should have been fought. The US and South Korea have now been very good allies for a long time thanks to that war. Thanks to that war, millions upon millions of South Koreans live free of the poverty and famine that those in North Korea have to suffer with. Vietnam isn't as defensible but I don't see your gripe with Korea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilVirus Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Russia was the one responsible for the defeat of Germans in WWII for several reasons. 1. Germans began to lose after the battle of Stalingrad - turning point of the war. After that, the Germans were pushed back into their own lands and this happened before the Invasion of Normandy, so US had nothing to do with it really except for supplies.2. The rest of Allied countries were crushed. France was invaded. England was bombed and focused all its strength on defense. 3. Losses are not what I based this on. Losses are a poor way of figuring out anything (unless they speak for themselves - like the US losses). Stalin did kill 10 million people when he was in power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurlyPIG Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Communism is immorral. The fate of the entire country and its economy is determined by a miniscule group of people. The capitalist system allows for the collective will of the people to control the economy. You can decide your own carreer. In a way, you also decide how much you work and how much you're payed, though the market plays a bigger role in your income. If you do twice the work you'll get twice the pay. If you do half the work you'll get half the pay. In communism everyone get's the same amount. There's no incentive for reasonable progress or harder work.Obviously true communism and true capitalism have never been used. A mixed economy that favours the capitalist side is best, IMO. The market of people controls the economy except for important services that are essential and should not be controlled by greed: health care, air travel, food, water utilities, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undsputed Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Yes but you seem as if Germany didn't have troops to the West. If Germany didn't fight on the Western front and concentrated only on Russians, you'd probably be speaking German. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilVirus Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Germany first took over the west and then concentrated most of its troops on Russia leaving few to fight in the west. You know, Operation Barbarossa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Russia would never have won without the Allies pushing the Germans back further. So don't place the win on the Russians solely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Russia would never have won without the Allies pushing the Germans back further. So don't place the win on the Russians solely.The allies distracted a lot of the German forces, yes. But most of the work was done by the soviets.Obviously true communism and true capitalism have never been used.I agree with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quoudam72 Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 :-[ Thank you for the correction Earthnuker I posted that backwards about the US supporting Castro to overthrow Batista Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted November 18, 2002 Author Share Posted November 18, 2002 Be glad the russians joined the allies, instead of the germans. Or I would probably be dead, or a nazi now... And what if the U.S. stayed out of the war? I don't think the russians would have defeated the germans all by themselves... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Which world war did Russia sign a Non-Aggression Treaty with the Germans? If you get my implication... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilVirus Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 If Germany did not attack Russia, we would all be screwed. We would probably have to live in a Nazi regime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.