|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 5, 2011 8:20:22 GMT -5
The people went along with it TB thus they are impicated. I figured you would get it eventually. In a sincere attempt to understand your view... You think the people willingly went along with this because? |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Dec 5, 2011 8:49:33 GMT -5
Take a look at a Jackson Indian Removal Policy where the rule of law got in his way and he gobbleygooked around it. I'm sure you can find an example .The rule of law is tweaked to Jackson and the peoples advantage(which would give them gold,farmland etc.,etc.,) and then the people go West thus going along with the idea of stealing the Indians land. I think it is quite clear."the more things change the more they remain the same" Don't be so shocked ! Hope Wall street didn't steal any of your money because it isn't funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 5, 2011 10:18:29 GMT -5
Take a look at a Jackson Indian Removal Policy where the rule of law got in his way and he gobbleygooked around it. I'm sure you can find an example .The rule of law is tweaked to Jackson and the peoples advantage(which would give them gold,farmland etc.,etc.,) and then the people go West thus going along with the idea of stealing the Indians land. I think it is quite clear."the more things change the more they remain the same" Don't be so shocked ! Hope Wall street didn't steal any of your money because it isn't funny. I have not made comment on any of this, and not sure I will. I am just asking questions to see what your view is on this. So what was Jackson's beef with the Indians? I guess it would have been all Indians in general not a specific tribe, which seems odd. Or did it stem from something one group of Indians did and therefore all Indians were as good as dead because of it? If I am reading you correctly "the people (soldiers, farmers, miners, etc)" became greedy and for this we should compare them to Saddam Hussein? |
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 5, 2011 17:54:39 GMT -5
Don't worry CC, I'm not trying to be a smart axx about this at all. I am just trying to understand your position on this issue. Way too many times myself I've been misunderstood about my own stance on the issues and have gotten into some pretty bad situations because of it. And it was all because someone misunderstood me. I think that may be the case here. Even if it isn't, your stance on this is interesting and I for one would like to hear it.
|
|
|
|
Post by strange on Dec 5, 2011 17:57:33 GMT -5
To canuck and TBW,
Jackson did horrible things to the particular indians he dealt with. I don't know as much about the seminoles, but The Cherokees were definitely very mistreated The Cherokees had a very sophisticated and reasonable civilization and they made great strides to try to talk to us about things rather than warring and raiding and plundering and having poor command structures like the (cough, clear throat) Sioux.
I imagine that Jackson was just acting as a conquering force and justifying himself as sorta like the American Alexander or Khan. Also, an assortment of Indians were working with the British at one time or another and that obviously ticked his nerves more than slightly from what I have heard.
Now with Saddam, I may as well elaborate my point since I brought him up...
He was raised rather impoverished, heavily abused, and was part of the minority Sunnis. And a King was in charge of Iraq. There is very little opportunity for advancement under those conditions unless you become a gangster or a terrorist or an assassin, which is what he did... which is sorta what he had to do.
But once the mountain was climbed, he still behaved exactly the way he did on the way up.
Revolutions and regime changes happen all throughout history. But if you become part of one of these revolutions and regime changes, you need to make sure that there is light at the end of the tunnel after all the smoke has cleared. If there is no light at the end of the tunnel, then people are only gonna end up where Saddam and Castro and Amin work themselves into, they are simply gonna rise and fall by whose brute force is stronger and once in power they are never gonna stop throwing their weight around or doing harsh things. Its gonna be like frying the hamburger after its already cooked, its just gonna turn blacker and blacker and shrivel up until it resembles the piece of charcoal sitting beneath of it and no one is gonna get to eat it or they will get sick if they do eat it.
Saddam went exactly as he came. He would sentence people to deaths, sometimes in bogus courts or just by his own orders, and then finally later he too was put to death by a court that had no real interest in trying his case seriously. It would have been more honest to simply skip the court process and have him killed, but it worked out either way, our leaders love wasting time and energy just to pretend they are more civilized than just ordering someone to death which is the logical thing to do for your war enemies.
Now, even though Saddam does have war experience, he basically came and went by the sword of his corruptions.
People who came and went by the sword of war... those would be your Richard The Lionhearts (who was a little bit of an a*****l from what I heard) and then of coarse your Vlad Draculas (very lucky for him he died in combat and not by his torture implements, though the fictional Dracula does get regularly staked or impaled ironically enough), guys like that.
Its a biblical phrase and it has its very real examples. It is not meant to be too overly obsessed over except just to remind people not to put anything in the way of worshiping God. We all live by the eternal God and if we follow him well enough then we in turn will also be eternal. But if people instead decide to trust their life strictly in the hands of a weaponly object, then they in turn will have the same life as the lifeless object they hold. Bear in mind, God empowered Samson to kill lots of people almost with his bare hands, then he has David killing Goliath with a stone, and he has one of the judges named Ehud (I hope thats the right one) who stabs someone with his left hand because his otherhand is crippled (thats part of the more intense study facts that you'll collect if you look into the translations, that not only does he use his left hand but that his right hand is "close handed" or worthless in some way, meaning he was a cripple), God prevails however he pleases and he is the only true living deity that exists to be worshiped.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 6, 2011 12:11:13 GMT -5
To canuck and TBW, Jackson did horrible things to the particular indians he dealt with. I don't know as much about the seminoles, but The Cherokees were definitely very mistreated The Cherokees had a very sophisticated and reasonable civilization and they made great strides to try to talk to us about things rather than warring and raiding and plundering and having poor command structures like the (cough, clear throat) Sioux. I imagine that Jackson was just acting as a conquering force and justifying himself as sorta like the American Alexander or Khan. Also, an assortment of Indians were working with the British at one time or another and that obviously ticked his nerves more than slightly from what I have heard. Now with Saddam, I may as well elaborate my point since I brought him up... He was raised rather impoverished, heavily abused, and was part of the minority Sunnis. And a King was in charge of Iraq. There is very little opportunity for advancement under those conditions unless you become a gangster or a terrorist or an assassin, which is what he did... which is sorta what he had to do. But once the mountain was climbed, he still behaved exactly the way he did on the way up. Revolutions and regime changes happen all throughout history. But if you become part of one of these revolutions and regime changes, you need to make sure that there is light at the end of the tunnel after all the smoke has cleared. If there is no light at the end of the tunnel, then people are only gonna end up where Saddam and Castro and Amin work themselves into, they are simply gonna rise and fall by whose brute force is stronger and once in power they are never gonna stop throwing their weight around or doing harsh things. Its gonna be like frying the hamburger after its already cooked, its just gonna turn blacker and blacker and shrivel up until it resembles the piece of charcoal sitting beneath of it and no one is gonna get to eat it or they will get sick if they do eat it. Saddam went exactly as he came. He would sentence people to deaths, sometimes in bogus courts or just by his own orders, and then finally later he too was put to death by a court that had no real interest in trying his case seriously. It would have been more honest to simply skip the court process and have him killed, but it worked out either way, our leaders love wasting time and energy just to pretend they are more civilized than just ordering someone to death which is the logical thing to do for your war enemies. Now, even though Saddam does have war experience, he basically came and went by the sword of his corruptions. People who came and went by the sword of war... those would be your Richard The Lionhearts (who was a little bit of an a*****l from what I heard) and then of coarse your Vlad Draculas (very lucky for him he died in combat and not by his torture implements, though the fictional Dracula does get regularly staked or impaled ironically enough), guys like that. Its a biblical phrase and it has its very real examples. It is not meant to be too overly obsessed over except just to remind people not to put anything in the way of worshiping God. We all live by the eternal God and if we follow him well enough then we in turn will also be eternal. But if people instead decide to trust their life strictly in the hands of a weaponly object, then they in turn will have the same life as the lifeless object they hold. Bear in mind, God empowered Samson to kill lots of people almost with his bare hands, then he has David killing Goliath with a stone, and he has one of the judges named Ehud (I hope thats the right one) who stabs someone with his left hand because his otherhand is crippled (thats part of the more intense study facts that you'll collect if you look into the translations, that not only does he use his left hand but that his right hand is "close handed" or worthless in some way, meaning he was a cripple), God prevails however he pleases and he is the only true living deity that exists to be worshiped. Thanks for that perspective Sir Strange. I think it rather highlights what I was getting at, but still won't comment on at this time. Again another very good post |
|
|
|
Post by strange on Dec 6, 2011 13:43:50 GMT -5
To canuck and TBW, Jackson did horrible things to the particular indians he dealt with. I don't know as much about the seminoles, but The Cherokees were definitely very mistreated The Cherokees had a very sophisticated and reasonable civilization and they made great strides to try to talk to us about things rather than warring and raiding and plundering and having poor command structures like the (cough, clear throat) Sioux. I imagine that Jackson was just acting as a conquering force and justifying himself as sorta like the American Alexander or Khan. Also, an assortment of Indians were working with the British at one time or another and that obviously ticked his nerves more than slightly from what I have heard. Now with Saddam, I may as well elaborate my point since I brought him up... He was raised rather impoverished, heavily abused, and was part of the minority Sunnis. And a King was in charge of Iraq. There is very little opportunity for advancement under those conditions unless you become a gangster or a terrorist or an assassin, which is what he did... which is sorta what he had to do. But once the mountain was climbed, he still behaved exactly the way he did on the way up. Revolutions and regime changes happen all throughout history. But if you become part of one of these revolutions and regime changes, you need to make sure that there is light at the end of the tunnel after all the smoke has cleared. If there is no light at the end of the tunnel, then people are only gonna end up where Saddam and Castro and Amin work themselves into, they are simply gonna rise and fall by whose brute force is stronger and once in power they are never gonna stop throwing their weight around or doing harsh things. Its gonna be like frying the hamburger after its already cooked, its just gonna turn blacker and blacker and shrivel up until it resembles the piece of charcoal sitting beneath of it and no one is gonna get to eat it or they will get sick if they do eat it. Saddam went exactly as he came. He would sentence people to deaths, sometimes in bogus courts or just by his own orders, and then finally later he too was put to death by a court that had no real interest in trying his case seriously. It would have been more honest to simply skip the court process and have him killed, but it worked out either way, our leaders love wasting time and energy just to pretend they are more civilized than just ordering someone to death which is the logical thing to do for your war enemies. Now, even though Saddam does have war experience, he basically came and went by the sword of his corruptions. People who came and went by the sword of war... those would be your Richard The Lionhearts (who was a little bit of an a*****l from what I heard) and then of coarse your Vlad Draculas (very lucky for him he died in combat and not by his torture implements, though the fictional Dracula does get regularly staked or impaled ironically enough), guys like that. Its a biblical phrase and it has its very real examples. It is not meant to be too overly obsessed over except just to remind people not to put anything in the way of worshiping God. We all live by the eternal God and if we follow him well enough then we in turn will also be eternal. But if people instead decide to trust their life strictly in the hands of a weaponly object, then they in turn will have the same life as the lifeless object they hold. Bear in mind, God empowered Samson to kill lots of people almost with his bare hands, then he has David killing Goliath with a stone, and he has one of the judges named Ehud (I hope thats the right one) who stabs someone with his left hand because his otherhand is crippled (thats part of the more intense study facts that you'll collect if you look into the translations, that not only does he use his left hand but that his right hand is "close handed" or worthless in some way, meaning he was a cripple), God prevails however he pleases and he is the only true living deity that exists to be worshiped. Thanks for that perspective Sir Strange. I think it rather highlights what I was getting at, but still won't comment on at this time. Again another very good post And one more point... Regardless of how crass Jackson was with the Indians, he did do good at keeping our freedom and democracy/republic alive during his presidency. And every citizen that criticized him was still free to speak the same way the next day. Jackson finally came and went and we started fresh again with the next guy to take office. Thus the beauty of our system. |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Dec 7, 2011 7:10:11 GMT -5
We all have fascisists tendencies some more than others of course,Jackson,Hussein etc. and our selves,some more than others of course, and there in lies much of the problems TB and Strange.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Dec 7, 2011 7:50:49 GMT -5
Seventy years ago today at 7:55 am some fascists attacked the United States .
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 7, 2011 8:43:47 GMT -5
We all have fascisists tendencies some more than others of course,Jackson,Hussein etc. and our selves,some more than others of course, and there in lies much of the problems TB and Strange. I'm not sure what or who you are applying the word fascist to son. But it isn't a word that I take lightly. If you are using this word to denigrate me and/or strange, which it appears that you are, as you made your address specifically to us in that post, ala, "We all have fascisists tendencies some more than others of course,Jackson,Hussein etc. and our selves,some more than others of course, and there in lies much of the problems TB and Strange." But I for one will not be referred to in such a manner. Nor will I allow you to use that term or anything like it for any member here. If you think for a moment that I have been overly oppressive-suppressive, or intolerant of your position on the issues here, you are and have been sadly mistaken in that. This is best exemplified by my last post on topic here before this one, which was sincerely stated in intent. Now you can either ignore the rest of this message and go back and read that post and respond to it or continue to read the following and ignore it, the choice is yours. So far all we've gotten from you is an I'm right an your wrong attitute from you without context. In addition to this, to make matters worse than needs be, because everyone has, in your words, "fascist" thoughts and views, as your own has thus far demonstrated, you continue to denigrate and smear through innuendo and more directly by name calling - that quite frankly is unwarranted, unwanted and uncalled for. If you want me to enforce the rules of this forum, keep trying my patience son and I will. First, last and only warning. |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Dec 7, 2011 9:02:23 GMT -5
I said EVERYONE has fascist tendecies some more severe than others.If you believe you don't,fine by me.And I don't take the word lightly as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 8, 2011 7:47:36 GMT -5
I said EVERYONE has fascist tendecies some more severe than others.If you believe you don't,fine by me.And I don't take the word lightly as well. I gave you time to think about this one, because I'm still waiting for you to provide some proof that everyone in this world has some weird tendency you've decided to impose upon them. Not only is this unfair, unjustified, and about every other word of like character I can think of, it is crude, rude and downright WRONG Sigmund. And I shouldn't even credit such a thinker with such a statement as not even he would have done so without putting it into some kind of context so it should be understood what he was trying to convey. Of course once again you've successfully succeeded in deflecting the conversation of this thread from its original intent and gone way off track from the original authors intent of message. Something much more interesting to you perhaps than discussing something about the LBH and what happened when all the bullets were gone? I suppose the dictatorial powers granted to the commanders of the companies could be discussed or even Custer's heavy handedness brought in to save your sorry behind on this one, but i seriously doubt it. Or maybe it was one of those lonely a$$ed privates who died all by themselves, a tyrant to the last, hell bent on doing things his way and was the last one to die and we didn't know of it. After all, they all, whites as well as Indians had fascist tendencies, and it should have manifested itself 1000 times over in that battle; enough for you to proclaim that they all died fascist hero's standing atop LSH instead of the fleeing cowards who tried to escape at the very end. Lets turn the corner here CC. A 180 spin really isn't such a bad thing, especially when the ice is thin and black. |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Dec 8, 2011 8:11:14 GMT -5
Fair enough TB,as "a prince should be slow to take action and should watch that he does not come to be afraid of his own shadow"-Machiavelli.We can agree to disagree about humanites fascist tendencies. As always there is a Colonel(pun intendent)of truth to what we say.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Dec 8, 2011 9:28:34 GMT -5
Fair enough TB,as "a prince should be slow to take action and should watch that he does not come to be afraid of his own shadow"-Machiavelli.We can agree to disagree about humanites fascist tendencies. As always there is a Colonel(pun intendent)of truth to what we say. Well, I would much prefer for us to think we would be more social, sociable, socialistic in what we do here, which would "tend" to be at the other end of the spectrum of which you speak. And I think in that regard "sharing" information and "caring" what we say and how we say it favors the good health and maintenance of this forum - which in turn provides an environment for friendship among all here. This should quell any fears of fascist lurking about waiting to impose their will upon such an unsuspecting lot. I would think. |
|
|
|
Post by crazycanuck on Dec 8, 2011 13:25:55 GMT -5
No one said there are full blown fascists lurking on the forum.I said everyone has in my opinion some fascists tendencies,some from mild, to full blown hardcore Nazis characteristics... [The rest was totally uncalled for]
[CC has been banned for a period of 2 days. Put this behind you CC and get on with discussing Custer and stop attacking people because you think they are not acting and saying things the way you think they should.]
|
|
