Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Annie, Oct 10, 2005.
Its not liberalism that let them down, it was the enormous cost
of their empire, and the need to defend it.
Unlike suggested in the article most subjects of the British Empire
rejected colonialism. Since Gutenberg political agitation is easy
to produce, for some time the Western cannon boat and divide
and conquer methods prevailed but it was never a constructed as a solid
long term operations. They pretty much used their empire as a free
export place while exploiting the raw materials and playing the local
The US is positioned differently. Vietnam and Somalia make it clear that
there is some cost analysis going on. The Us also tolerates alot more
independence and created a series of allies like Japan and Korea.
In prinicipal democratic ideas are the same as in Europe , the closest
competitor. Number 3 on the horizon China trades hugely with
Japan, EU and the US.
I would assume that all of them prefer the status quo. There is
really no "Germany" top challenge the hegemony currently.
In the long run the US has to be worried about the deficits it is running.
The war in Iraq is just an example that the current hyperpower is
The war and occupation will probably cost around 1/2 a trillion $ before
its over. Operations like this should inflict fear into possible enemies mind.
Now we have to wait and see how long it takes before the next
intervention is necessary. If the other troublemakes obliege
to American interest for the next 20 years it was a good investment.
If more operations are necessary then it was a failure.
You're forgetting that Britain's liberal labor party revitalized their industry and brought their lower classes out of poverty and provided medical care and education reform for all their citizens that brought them up to speed with the rest of the modern world. What ruined them was that their labor unions ran amock and caused their production expenses to go through the roof. And we mustn't forget the worldwide recession that hit during the seventies and eighties, which also worstened their conditions. Thatcherism and Reaganism were just what the doctor ordered during those times: fiscal conservatism. You can't blame English libs for the downfall of their empire. It's preposterous.
Then why don't ya just move to England and experience the HIV medical benefits et al...good Lord ya are talking apples and oranges...to treat your so called perversion of medical benefits...when ya 'suck' ya must duck...or something like that...medical benefits in Britton are 'bust' for the most part...back to 'Health 101' for ya!
Britain's healthcare system may be declining from what it once was when it was first set up, but the WHO still ranks Britain's healthcare system higher in overall patient value for the money than the US. The US is ranked 30th in the world in overall medical care. You smartass SOB. Keep dishing it out old man.
now there is your clue...I have had a great and long life...still active and the youngn's still find me 'sexy' now where is it that you will be...save Brittons...health care program...ROTFLMAO!
side note...Hetro being the game.....geeeeez!...reality check here!
You got a link to back that up? And a credible link, not some rag so full of shit I could fertilize my yard with.
30th huh? and who was first? Funny how the US is 30th (or so you say) yet people come from around the world for our revolutionary disease treatments and cures that we invented. While many countries whined and complained and panicked about HIV/AIDS, we DID something about it. Now getting the virus is no longer a death sentence. Where were the other countries in the aid in researching treatments for it? Hmmm...I will wait for a true, factual answer from you.
I live in MN, and I know for a fact that the Mayo Clinic alone has discovered more vaccines, cures, and breakthrough treatments for more illnesses than all other able countries combined. Many world leaders come here for cancer or other illness treatments.
The WHO ratings have nothing to do with technological advances. They are based on what patients get for the money they put in. How much bang for the buck. I misspoke when I said the US was 30th. The 2000 world health report has us ranked 37th out of 191 countries.
I assume this is some backhanded insult directed at me and the New York Times. I would take you seriously except for the fact that the NYT is the most prestigious and well put together newspaper in the country. Sorry it's not Michelle Malkin.
Guess that's why all those watch dog organizations have sprung up to make sure that what the NYT prints is the truth. Name one other newspaper that has to have watch dog organizations to make sure its readers get the truth and not liberal propaganda. The NYT is just another liberal MSM outlet, and I, for one, am glad I do not have to depend upon it for my news. Unless you like the lies and slated news reporting, it is neither "prestigious" nor "well put together".
Actually, Americans are starting to travel more and more overseas to other countries where the government hasn't stalled medical progress.
Separate names with a comma.