Those liverpool fans are scarey! :alien:

And you're certain of that how, Deadbeater? Hey, Parliament and Queen could call on the SAS and SBS and Royal Marines...

I'll answer Rich's provocative question with another: could any of them have voted to be liberated from Saddam, do you suppose?

DanaC, that you're incredulous shows just how different our two respective paradigms of the proper sphere of a government are. Your people would be in a much more stable position for retaining British-style limited government -- a going concern since the Magna Carta -- without your draconian gun laws. They have the effect of removing the popular restraint upon the governmental sphere, the sort of thing we Americans sum up in the phrase "checks and balances."

UG, I really don't see where the US being an armed republic has stopped the government from acting as overlords to the people or where it has protected the people from bad government.

I do, having studied places -- a few close up -- with bad government in them. We do a lot better than that, so much so it isn't even a contest.

Of course you do UG. It's a western civilization and one you're comfortable in. Of course it seems better than something you're not familiar with.

How can you be so sure your way is the best way?

UG, I'm curious now--give us a recent example of how the US as an armed republic has protected us from bad government.

The Reagan Adminstration and the younger Bush's Administration, thank you. These do the sort of things I like us doing, and they don't mess with Americans' civil rights. The Clinton Administration failed in these and positively invited a gray cloud of corruption to hang over the White House, the senior Bush's Administration promised to continue acting like the Reagan but failed to, and the Carter Administration was simply weak.

Along with Robert Heinlein, I reckon it good to retain all options fully open in sociopolitics, even the comparatively unpleasant ones: as troubling as it is to shoot somebody, it's worse to suffer genocide at the hands of said somebody. This seems to me self-evident, but man, loud are the screechings when I voice it. There is such a thing as too much bowing to authority.

I seem to favor Administrations that are good at foreign policy -- and are assertive about it regardless of clamor sent up from foreign shores. Somehow, what we do never seems to destroy nations, despite their hollering.

Aliantha -- reading history. And I've spent a bit of time in my life surrounded by Eastern civilizations also: Japan definitely has its shit together, while Turkey is more iffy, more Third World -- but with much that gives me hope.

Still waiting...

And our country can call on our militaries. Do you honestly believe that the average citizen with a rifle would stand a chance against our SF? A group of a hundred overweight dudes who play militia on the weekends would be brought low by a squad or two of marines. Hell, a couple of National Guardsmen. Put some rifles in Air Force AC repairmen's hands and they are STILL better trained and equipped. If you think your arsenal gives you ANY protection against our government, you're crazier than I imagined.

And Merc, while I do agree that it's ridiculous to assume we're anywhere near Saddam in OUR actions, it should be pointed out that all the insurgents and terrorists running around now are certainly just as bad if not worse. And also, we do take people from their families on slim evidence. We do give them back, but they're bruised, maybe a little bloody. We do tell the medical examiners to sign two admittance forms in case the prisoners receive some accidental injuries.

Lotsa edits... enjoy! And I've really got to shut down soon. Let us pause to digest and really write some essays, or link to Philosophy...

Queeq, that argument displays a lack of understanding of guerrilla tactics and strategies -- and that lack drops it into a pitfall. People knowledgeable about unconventional warfare don't say things like that.

Have a gander at the book Protracted Conflict sometime. A classic.

Wow! :eek: I didn't even notice that. The Bush Jr administration doesn't impede civil rights. Definitely have had some great media freedoms, right? Haven't had any problems with freedom of speech at protests or rallies. Absolutely no privacy issues. Holy crap. We don't destroy nations? We did certainly do a great job with our current endeavor. Also, Vietnam was doing well when we left, too, huh?

I give up, UG. You're just bat-shit crazy. You outcrazied all my arguments. There's no response. I might just stop bothering to respond. :headshake:

Digest is the key word here..the man's obviously had too much curry tonight. ;)

He is very verbose

Says who? Do you know how much it would cost to do that for every person detained? It ain't happening dude.