Can you give one reason why you would NOT vote for a Libertarian?

[elvis]

Britain and France were beaten in three weeks (in France) I often wonder what would have happened if we had sent troops.

Probably little more than a higher death and injury total of American boys, since FDR was already in the process of provoking the Japanese.

Do you think he was provoking the Japs on purpose?

 

[JBeukema]

don't like it that he was a fan of "Birth of a Nation"?

That's his own business. The racist policies he instituted in the hiring of federal employees, and the effective reversal of changed that had been made by those before him to provide opportunities to rise to positions more suitable to their skills (though equality was still a ways away) is another matter, however. He removed Blacks from positions that had been set aside fro persons of color and effectively purged his administration and all aspects if the Fed that he could of anyone of color. This was counterproductive to the cause of racial equality.

He also was an unapologetic international military interventionist, who had to lie and manipulate America into WWI.....Which merely set the table for WWII.....and so on....

Lest we forget the Federal Reserve, income tax, and 17th Amendment, which rendered the states impotent in the size and scope of federal budgets.

So you agree? Fuck Wilson?

 

[Oddball]

Britain and France were beaten in three weeks (in France) I often wonder what would have happened if we had sent troops.

Probably little more than a higher death and injury total of American boys, since FDR was already in the process of provoking the Japanese.

Do you think he was provoking the Japs on purpose?

Absolutely.

Japan had the agreement with Germany, which is why the Germans declared war on America in reciprocity for the American declaration upon Japan.

Besides that, the AVG was deployed and in action prior to 7 December.

 

[Agnapostate]

The only purpose government has to serve in a free market capitalist economy is to protect contract and property rights.Period. I don't want government to even have a central bank, I want the economy to run essentially identical to how our Constitution intended it to operate. Anything more than that is slowly steering away from free market. I don't mind forfeiting some rights (and wealth) for a small (perhaps even moderate) welfare state, but other than that I want the government out of as many business affairs as possible.

Capitalism would not remain a viable economic system absent government presence. As further noted by Yu:

[The government] possesses some unique features that distinguish it from the firm. Such features allows the government to regulate competition, reduce uncertainty and provide a relatively stable exchange environment. Specifically, in the area of industrial policy, the government can help private enterprises tackle uncertainty in the following ways: first, locating the focal point by initiating projects; providing assurance and guarantees to the large investment project; and facilitating the exchange of information; second, reducing excessive competition by granting exclusive rights; and third, facilitating learning and diffusion of technologies, and assisting infant industry firms to build up competence. The history of developmental success indicates that the market and the state are not opposed forms of social organisation, but interactively linked (Rodrik, 1997, p. 437). In the prospering and dynamic nations, public-private coordination tends to prevail. Dynamic private enterprises assisted by government coordination explain the successful economic performances in the post-war Japan and the Asian newly industrialising economies. It is their governments' consistent and coordinated attentiveness to the economic problems that differentiates the entrepreneurial states (Yu, 1997) from the predatory states (Boaz and Polak, 1997).

The welfare state is a necessary means of maintaining economic efficiency in the capitalist economy, which is why your "free market" does not exist. It has never existed; it is a historical non-reality, and a utopian textbook fantasy with no chance of feasible implementation. Be an empiricist, not an ideologue.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In regard to WW2, should we have sent troops into the rheinland in 1936 even though France and Britain refused? (this was Hitler's first violation of Versailles.)

We should have voiced our concerns with appeasement and tried to force Britain and France to take action. We should have done the same with the Austrian take over and the Sudetenland fiasco. Once War was declared we should have sided with Britain. We did not because of Isolationism.

Britain and France were beaten in three weeks (in France) I often wonder what would have happened if we had sent troops.

It took 6 weeks to beat France and that had more to do with incompetent leadership then the superiority of the Germans, France had thousands of 1st rate fighter and bomber aircraft they never used. Their tanks were better armored and better gunned then the Germans, they had more troops with modern weapons in the field then German as well.

The British were better trained , better armed and better prepared but followed the French lead. The two Countries had NO concept of cooperation which further hampered the two armies. British tanks were better then German tanks as well and both France and Britain had more and better artillery.

If the French had been competently lead the Germans would have been stopped in Belgium and stopped at the river where Meus is. The breakthrough would never have occurred if the French had been better lead, they had the armor and troops to stop it. And they were in the right places to do so.

 

[Oddball]

So you agree? Fuck Wilson?

Without question....Including his do-gooder interventionist military nation building.

 

[elvis]

We should have voiced our concerns with appeasement and tried to force Britain and France to take action. We should have done the same with the Austrian take over and the Sudetenland fiasco. Once War was declared we should have sided with Britain. We did not because of Isolationism.

Britain and France were beaten in three weeks (in France) I often wonder what would have happened if we had sent troops.

It took 6 weeks to beat France and that had more to do with incompetent leadership then the superiority of the Germans, France had thousands of 1st rate fighter and bomber aircraft they never used. Their tanks were better armored and better gunned then the Germans, they had more troops with modern weapons in the field then German as well.

The British were better trained , better armed and better prepared but followed the French lead. The two Countries had NO concept of cooperation which further hampered the two armies. British tanks were better then German tanks as well and both France and Britain had more and better artillery.

If the French had been competently lead the Germans would have been stopped in Belgium and stopped at the river where Meus is. The breakthrough would never have occurred if the French had been better lead, they had the armor and troops to stop it. And they were in the right places to do so.

I knew they were outnumbered but I thought they were overwhelmed by the blitzkrieg tactics.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Probably little more than a higher death and injury total of American boys, since FDR was already in the process of provoking the Japanese.

Do you think he was provoking the Japs on purpose?

Absolutely.

Japan had the agreement with Germany, which is why the Germans declared war on America in reciprocity for the American declaration upon Japan.

Besides that, the AVG was deployed and in action prior to 7 December.

Ya, we should have just kept selling oil and scrap metal to a country involved in a war we disapproved of. What fucking world do you live in? Where did you learn your history.

We willingly sold oil and scrap metal to Japan even as they Occupied parts of China. We stopped when Japan went back on a broad offensive to conquer more of China. Fucking idiot.

 

[Oddball]

I knew they were outnumbered but I thought they were overwhelmed by the blitzkrieg tactics.

Indeed they were.

French tanks were even technologically superior to the Pz 35 and Pz 38....They suffered from inferior tactics.

 

[Oddball]

Do you think he was provoking the Japs on purpose?

Absolutely.

Japan had the agreement with Germany, which is why the Germans declared war on America in reciprocity for the American declaration upon Japan.

Besides that, the AVG was deployed and in action prior to 7 December.

Ya, we should have just kept selling oil and scrap metal to a country involved in a war we disapproved of. What fucking world do you live in? Where did you learn your history.

We willingly sold oil and scrap metal to Japan even as they Occupied parts of China. We stopped when Japan went back on a broad offensive to conquer more of China. Fucking idiot.

O.K....So you admit that FDR purposefully provoked the Japs....Now we're getting somewhere.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Britain and France were beaten in three weeks (in France) I often wonder what would have happened if we had sent troops.

It took 6 weeks to beat France and that had more to do with incompetent leadership then the superiority of the Germans, France had thousands of 1st rate fighter and bomber aircraft they never used. Their tanks were better armored and better gunned then the Germans, they had more troops with modern weapons in the field then German as well.

The British were better trained , better armed and better prepared but followed the French lead. The two Countries had NO concept of cooperation which further hampered the two armies. British tanks were better then German tanks as well and both France and Britain had more and better artillery.

If the French had been competently lead the Germans would have been stopped in Belgium and stopped at the river where Meus is. The breakthrough would never have occurred if the French had been better lead, they had the armor and troops to stop it. And they were in the right places to do so.

I knew they were outnumbered but I thought they were overwhelmed by the blitzkrieg tactics.

On the French side De Gaul understood tank tactics and combined Arms, the aged and incompetent high command still thought it was 1918 and tried to fight the war that way. To them tanks were toys and aircraft were ineffective. AGAIN if they had competent leadership the French were a match for Germany in 1939. As for the British Army, it was never seriously tested in Belgium. With the breakthrough and encirclement they were cut off and rather then try to breakthrough to the French Army chose to evacuate. They had little choice, the French and British Armies had almost no communications and no joint plans or any cooperation.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Absolutely.

Japan had the agreement with Germany, which is why the Germans declared war on America in reciprocity for the American declaration upon Japan.

Besides that, the AVG was deployed and in action prior to 7 December.

Ya, we should have just kept selling oil and scrap metal to a country involved in a war we disapproved of. What fucking world do you live in? Where did you learn your history.

We willingly sold oil and scrap metal to Japan even as they Occupied parts of China. We stopped when Japan went back on a broad offensive to conquer more of China. Fucking idiot.

O.K....So you admit that FDR purposefully provoked the Japs....Now we're getting somewhere.

FUCKING MORON. What part of " we stopped selling them material because we disagreed with their war" don't you understand? All Japan had to do was stop waging war in China. The US had made perfectly clear to Japan that if they resumed their war we would stop trading with them.

 

[elvis]

It took 6 weeks to beat France and that had more to do with incompetent leadership then the superiority of the Germans, France had thousands of 1st rate fighter and bomber aircraft they never used. Their tanks were better armored and better gunned then the Germans, they had more troops with modern weapons in the field then German as well.

The British were better trained , better armed and better prepared but followed the French lead. The two Countries had NO concept of cooperation which further hampered the two armies. British tanks were better then German tanks as well and both France and Britain had more and better artillery.

If the French had been competently lead the Germans would have been stopped in Belgium and stopped at the river where Meus is. The breakthrough would never have occurred if the French had been better lead, they had the armor and troops to stop it. And they were in the right places to do so.

I knew they were outnumbered but I thought they were overwhelmed by the blitzkrieg tactics.

On the French side De Gaul understood tank tactics and combined Arms, the aged and incompetent high command still thought it was 1918 and tried to fight the war that way. To them tanks were toys and aircraft were ineffective. AGAIN if they had competent leadership the French were a match for Germany in 1939. As for the British Army, it was never seriously tested in Belgium. With the breakthrough and encirclement they were cut off and rather then try to breakthrough to the French Army chose to evacuate. They had little choice, the French and British Armies had almost no communications and no joint plans or any cooperation.

Brits were lucky Hitler didn't slaughter them at Dunkirk.

 

[Oddball]

Ya, we should have just kept selling oil and scrap metal to a country involved in a war we disapproved of. What fucking world do you live in? Where did you learn your history.

We willingly sold oil and scrap metal to Japan even as they Occupied parts of China. We stopped when Japan went back on a broad offensive to conquer more of China. Fucking idiot.

O.K....So you admit that FDR purposefully provoked the Japs....Now we're getting somewhere.

FUCKING MORON. What part of " we stopped selling them material because we disagreed with their war" don't you understand? All Japan had to do was stop waging war in China. The US had made perfectly clear to Japan that if they resumed their war we would stop trading with them.

You can secure the drill sergeant shit...It neither impresses nor intimidates me.

If FDR hadn't intervened, Chang quite probably have crushed Mao....And we all know what a great deal Mao ended up being.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I knew they were outnumbered but I thought they were overwhelmed by the blitzkrieg tactics.

On the French side De Gaul understood tank tactics and combined Arms, the aged and incompetent high command still thought it was 1918 and tried to fight the war that way. To them tanks were toys and aircraft were ineffective. AGAIN if they had competent leadership the French were a match for Germany in 1939. As for the British Army, it was never seriously tested in Belgium. With the breakthrough and encirclement they were cut off and rather then try to breakthrough to the French Army chose to evacuate. They had little choice, the French and British Armies had almost no communications and no joint plans or any cooperation.

Brits were lucky Hitler didn't slaughter them at Dunkirk.

They would have still gotten out a good number of men and they would have seriously bloodied the Germans in the process. BUT yes Hitler screwed up royally on letting them leave with out a fight.

 

[Lightfiend]

Capitalism would not remain a viable economic system absent government presence. As further noted by Yu:

[The government] possesses some unique features that distinguish it from the firm. Such features allows the government to regulate competition, reduce uncertainty and provide a relatively stable exchange environment. Specifically, in the area of industrial policy, the government can help private enterprises tackle uncertainty in the following ways: first, locating the focal point by initiating projects; providing assurance and guarantees to the large investment project; and facilitating the exchange of information; second, reducing excessive competition by granting exclusive rights; and third, facilitating learning and diffusion of technologies, and assisting infant industry firms to build up competence. The history of developmental success indicates that the market and the state are not opposed forms of social organisation, but interactively linked (Rodrik, 1997, p. 437). In the prospering and dynamic nations, public-private coordination tends to prevail. Dynamic private enterprises assisted by government coordination explain the successful economic performances in the post-war Japan and the Asian newly industrialising economies. It is their governments' consistent and coordinated attentiveness to the economic problems that differentiates the entrepreneurial states (Yu, 1997) from the predatory states (Boaz and Polak, 1997).

The welfare state is a necessary means of maintaining economic efficiency in the capitalist economy, which is why your "free market" does not exist. It has never existed; it is a historical non-reality, and a utopian textbook fantasy with no chance of feasible implementation. Be an empiricist, not an ideologue.

To be completely honest with you, Agnapostate, I just don't buy it. Logic is not an idealogue, and I don't believe economics is an empirical science. Government's undermine the intelligence of the individual to live and grow and make mistakes and only then can the individual become most prosperous. Only then can a society become most prosperous. I cannot help but witness all the times governments have intervened and failed their people, including during the Great Depression (Hoover was no non-interventionist!) Politicians are simply not smart enough to control an economy.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

O.K....So you admit that FDR purposefully provoked the Japs....Now we're getting somewhere.

FUCKING MORON. What part of " we stopped selling them material because we disagreed with their war" don't you understand? All Japan had to do was stop waging war in China. The US had made perfectly clear to Japan that if they resumed their war we would stop trading with them.

You can secure the drill sergeant shit...It neither impresses nor intimidates me.

If FDR hadn't intervened, Chang quite probably have crushed Mao....And we all know what a great deal Mao ended up being.

That is NOT what we are talking about dumb ass. Further, while FDR made the back room deals, Truman stuck to them stupidly after FDR died. FDR was a sick old man, he came to think Stalin was a great guy, he sold out Churchill and the the Eastern Europeans as well as Chang Ki Shek.

All of which as NOTHING to do with why we stopped selling to Japan.

 

[Oddball]

FUCKING MORON. What part of " we stopped selling them material because we disagreed with their war" don't you understand? All Japan had to do was stop waging war in China. The US had made perfectly clear to Japan that if they resumed their war we would stop trading with them.

You can secure the drill sergeant shit...It neither impresses nor intimidates me.

If FDR hadn't intervened, Chang quite probably have crushed Mao....And we all know what a great deal Mao ended up being.

That is NOT what we are talking about dumb ass. Further, while FDR made the back room deals, Truman stuck to them stupidly after FDR died. FDR was a sick old man, he came to think Stalin was a great guy, he sold out Churchill and the the Eastern Europeans as well as Chang Ki Shek.

All of which as NOTHING to do with why we stopped selling to Japan.

That the west ultimately sold out Chang is irrelevant. They sold out Poland, too.

American intervention gave Mao time to recoup and reorganize.

 

[Nik]

Really? Can I see the figures for this?

It's been a well known fact that gubmint aid eats up about 2/3 of the monies for welfare programs in bureaucracy and overhead, where private charities come in at about 10%-15%, for quite some time now.

Thats a well known fact? Really? Seems your well known fact, is a flat out lie.

Welfare Administrative Costs (OEI-05-91-01080; 2/95)

Page 31. Nothing even remotely close to 2/3. Most under 10%. Makes you look pretty stupid, eh?

 

[Oddball]

Yeah...And we know that gubmint bureaucrats always tell the truth about their waste and overhead, and never ever fudge the books.