TheBig3

Can I just say that the troubles are not unique to this time period and the fact that you picked the 60's and 70's is just laughable. Just because they had glam rock did not mean times were good. (I personally think that means its worse) but in order for everything to be Hunky Dory (god im witty) that qould require a majority to be above the average on things like intelligence and culture.

By its very nature, you can't have a majority above average. People are always going to have problems, and times are never going to be as great as everyone would like. If you disagree then go starve yourself.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

jr.

Politics is simply crooks robbing from thieves and all of them lying about it. Always has been, always will be.

As far as war never solving anything, I suppose we could still have slavery in the U.S., all of Europe could be being run by Nazis, etc, etc.

Of course, what do I know? I'm a baby boomer who's ready to die anyway, right?

__________________
Be strong then, and enter into your own body;
there you have a solid place for your feet. ~ Kabir

bungalow

1. The Civil War did not end slavery, the Emancipation Proclamation took care of that.
2. Sure, but what did WWII lead to?
-The Cold War
-The Berlin Wall
-The Vietnam War
-The Korean War

jr.

Well, the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't put into effect until 1863, a full two years into the Civil War, and even then, the only reason it came about was because Lincoln was afforded certain powers that a president only has durng war time, per the U.S. Constitution. I must admit, I'm a little rusty on exactly what 'extra powers' they might be, it's been a while since I was in school.

Even so, the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't law, merely a proclamation. It declared the freedom of slaves in Conferderate states, but those slaves only gained their freedom when the Northern armies came in and took control. The Emancipation Proclamation didn't 'take care' of anything. The Union armies were the ones who actually enabled slaves to walk away free people. The only slaves who were immediately and magically 'free' when the proclamation came about, were the ones who were already runaway slaves being held as war contraband in Union camps.


As far as the Cold, Korean, and Vietnam Wars, as well as the Berlin Wall, Well, I suppose we could go back to the 1940's and just hit 'reset', and let Hitler have his way. Then we could cross off "Jewish people" completely, I suppose.

__________________
Be strong then, and enter into your own body;
there you have a solid place for your feet. ~ Kabir

sleepy jack

Theres a huge difference between Ghandi and tdoc.

__________________

jr.

Ghandi was a world figure, known by millions.

__________________
Be strong then, and enter into your own body;
there you have a solid place for your feet. ~ Kabir

Raine

The Emancipation Proclamation didn't end slavery, it gave people of color the right to bear arms (weapons).

Would you have rather Germany won WWII?

Peace

__________________
A pair of powerful spectacles has sometimes sufficed to cure a person in love.

~ Friedrich Nietzsche

Crowe

Oh goodness... Raine, I've never interacted with you on the forums before... but you are saying some pretty... dumb things, to be blunt. I suggest you take 5 minutes and go research the Emancipation Proclamation and then come back and tell us what you've learned about something you have very little knowledge about. I'm not attacking you here, but helping you not to make a fool of yourselves around people who know what they are talking about. The right for colored people to bear arms was granted through individual state legislatures and the process of allowing our darker friends went through several stages - such as the Black Codes, etc. And these laws didn't even apply to JUST blacks- as the people were not afraid so much of blacks in those days, but Indians (not Ghandi, but Tonto) were a much larger threat.

Now, I don't remember this for sure - but I don't even remember the Emancipation Proclamation mentioning the right of colored people to do anything with arms at all...

And how can you say we (the US) have deserved everything and we will always deserved to be attacked? And you call yourself a proud citizen? Go tell the family members of the WTC, and the injured that their family members "Deserved" to die, that the injured deserved to be maimed or crippled or emotionally scarred. Walk up and tell them to their face. Have someone video tape it - and I'll send the recording of your face being ripped off to CNN, after all... you probably deserved it. And I guess if somebody in the position of authority said "HEY LET'S KILL ALL PEOPLE BORN IN 1989 BECAUSE A 16 YEAR OLD HIT MY DOG TODAY" you would be dead, and by your logic... you would deserve it.

Please. Go sneak into a rated R movie and take a break from this thread. Or at least do you and the rest of us a favor and do a little research before you run your mouth off, ok? I am sorry if I came off a little harsh, but take a step back and try to comprehend the ignorance of the statements you made. You have single handedly discounted the efforts of millions of people to secure rights (while not always successful, thanks for mentioning) that were previously unheard of in the history of time.

Love you, Crowe.

PS: Are people ignoring Big3's posts? Why do you think corruption, and national problems are a unique trait of America? Should we really go through the histories of other countries and bring out the little skeletons in the national closet? Psh.

__________________

bungalow

Is there really the need to tell me what "arms" are. I think I understand.
Unlike you, who seems to be totally oblivious and undereducated.

I am aware that other nations have their "skeletons", but as an American, our skeletons facinate me most.

Strummer521

TDOC, this isn't an essay, it's a rant. And a barely coherent one at that. You need to learn some grammer skills and sentence structure (use periods for God's sake!). Also the fact that you condemn your friend's use of racial slurs and then make a generalized condemnation of censorship in the next sentence. If you're fully against censorship, then you have to allow people to say whatever they want when they want. Otherwise be more specific about your concern. Say you feel censorship should be scaled back, but not completely abolished. Are you just venting...or is there a point to this juevenalia? If you want to make a statment that people will take seriously...spelling is important. So is factual evidence to support your claims and a little more substance to your argument.