CPAC...Round them up and Send them to Camp Gitmo

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Who do you care about more? Your family, or some strange family in some random country in say . . . Nigeria?

 

My own, of course. But why Nigeria? Why not use Germany in your example?

 

How about this:

 

Who do you care about more? A family whose skin color is the same as yours, or some strange country where it isn't the same as yours?

 

All that being said - I am more sympathetic to European Christian populations. They are more like us and myself.

 

You seem to also DEFINE the USA as that, which makes all non-Eurpean/non-Christians as somehow foreigners in their own country.

[TheScout]

"My own, of course. But why Nigeria? Why not use Germany in your example?"

 

Just picked a random country. Could have picked Peru, Albania, Burma, Mongolia. I can more about my family than one in Germany though too.

 

"How about this:

 

Who do you care about more? A family whose skin color is the same as yours, or some strange country where it isn't the same as yours?"

 

I don't follow your question. Like most people who care to admit it or not, I like people more like myself the most. I relate the most to them.

 

"You seem to also DEFINE the USA as that, which makes all non-Eurpean/non-Christians as somehow foreigners in their own country."

 

Not foreigners, its called a minority.

 

[Beavah]

Yah, Merlyn, sad to say yeh might have the right conclusion there. The tragic underbelly of some of the Ron Paul states-rights crowd is its nearly overt racial ugliness.

 

Problem with both Rwanda and Sudan is logistics, eh? Devilishly hard to get to landlocked entities.

 

B

 

[TheScout]

"Yah, Merlyn, sad to say yeh might have the right conclusion there. The tragic underbelly of some of the Ron Paul states-rights crowd is its nearly overt racial ugliness."

 

What does state's rights have to do with racial ugliness? It is one of the oldest American poltical beliefs. Predates the union. Believe it or not, some of us actually believe government can best be directed at its lowest levels.

 

"Problem with both Rwanda and Sudan is logistics, eh? Devilishly hard to get to landlocked entities."

 

Afghanistan is a landlocked entity. We seem quite able to put a lot of resources there. Iraq is basically landlocked. We have 150,000 troops there. That is an absurd argument. With modern logistics we can put people anywhere we want. We have all Army brigades that on stand by ready to perform air assault missions on a moments notice.

 

Bosnia was virtually landlocked. Kosovo and Serbia are too. We intervened there. Cambodia was not landlocked. Didn't do anything there.

 

I don't know why it is so hard to admit America cares more about Europe than other places, especially in the deep dark of Africa . . .

 

[Beavah]

What does state's rights have to do with racial ugliness?

 

You're jokin', right?

 

As for da rest, do you have any notion of how hard it is to conduct military operations on a long supply line in a remote area? Any notion of the diplomacy required to secure staging areas and overfly neighboring countries?

 

B

 

[GernBlansten]

Give TheScout a break. He's viewing the world through an academic prism. Another 20 years or so of having to face life's daily challenges will season him well. Reality has that effect on people. Especially after he has kids.

[TheScout]

"What does state's rights have to do with racial ugliness?

 

You're jokin', right?"

 

No. States deal with the same issues as the nation as a whole. They just do it at a level closer to the people. I guess that sounds bad to you?

 

"As for da rest, do you have any notion of how hard it is to conduct military operations on a long supply line in a remote area? Any notion of the diplomacy required to secure staging areas and overfly neighboring countries?"

 

We seemed to pull it off pretty well in Iraq and Afghanistan. I doubt we would need 150,000 troops in Rwanda, its tiny. Send Uganda a couple hundred million dollars and you get any rights over their territory you need.

 

"Give TheScout a break. He's viewing the world through an academic prism. Another 20 years or so of having to face life's daily challenges will season him well. Reality has that effect on people. Especially after he has kids."

 

What is that supposed to mean? You have no idea what I have gone through or how I have done for myself after my studies. I hope time will not lead me to socialism and immorality.

 

People often say the youth are liberal and get more conservative in time . . .

 

I doubt I will embrace socialism and immorality in time.

 

 

[GernBlansten]

"People often say the youth are liberal and get more conservative in time . . .

I doubt I will embrace socialism and immorality in time. "

 

Certainly you can't equate socialism with immorality can you?

 

Actually, I'm the exact opposite. Coming out of college, I was filled with spit and vinegar like you. Very conservative. A real ideologue. But as life unfolded, reality set it. The world isn't black and white. Its a blend of all colors. The choice of your mate will influence you beyond your comprehesion. Mix in having a child who has special needs. Talk about a dose of reality. Suddenly, that ideology doesn't fit anymore. You start looking outside the box for answers. As I aged, I realized this existance isn't just about me, but about my fellow man. E pluribus unum. We are all in this together. That isn't socialism, its just being a good person.

 

[TheScout]

I wasn't equating the two. I was just saying two things I hope not to embrace. Though perhaps you could say socialism was immoral. Income redistribution does not necesarily strike me as moral. But that is for a different day . . .

 

 

" But as life unfolded, reality set it. The world isn't black and white. Its a blend of all colors."

 

With all due respect that comes off as moral relativism, a great tyranny of our time as described by the Pope himself.

 

Stick to the Church. It makes hard moral decisions a lot easier. Good morals do not change in time. What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong.

[GernBlansten]

TheScout, have you ever traveled overseas? You sound like someone who's entire opinion on the world is from books and not real experiences.

[TheScout]

I have not yet. Though my work will be taking me overseas soon.

 

Books are a great resource. I am not sure how else one can learn so much in such short periods of time.

[GernBlansten]

Books are wonderful. Especially if you read ones that challenge your viewpoint not the ones that just confirm it.

 

International travel will open your eyes and opinions. Too often, Americans formulate them from too narrow a vista. Sometimes you have to leave the trees to get a good view of the forest.

[OldGreyEagle]

gern, not to get too far off on a tangent, like that never happens, but this talk of international travel raises a question.

 

So, one could postulate that a person doesn't truly become educated until one travels internatinally

 

And if we make this supposition, then we are implying that only the wealthy are capable of being truly educated as they are the ones with the resources to travel internationally. And we are telling young people not to save money in they youth but to spend it in on the International Arena

 

Now, I am not saying I beleive the above, but it is a counter argument. How do you answer that thinking International Travel is a requirement to be considered truly educated is elitist, classist and overall not nice?

[TheScout]

I almost wrote that exact same thing about being elitest. But I didn't.

[Hal_Crawford]

Perhaps one could re-phrase Gern's point of view by suggesting that before someone can claim to be an expert they should have more experience than just reading books.

 

I have a friend whose father knows about two places in the world, rural Arkansas where he was born, raised and lived most of his life and China, where he served during WW2. Definitely not a member of the elite but I would take what he says about China more seriously than I would something said by TheScout who has only read books.

 

"I am not sure how else one can learn so much in such short periods of time." There is great value in reading but one could also say that it is the only way to learn so much misinformation in such short periods. I have read many books where the authors did not know what they were talking about. Reading another book could completely change the reader's point of view.

 

On another thread TheScout deplored the actions of the president of Brazil. I asked him if he had ever been to Brazil or if he knew anything of Brazilian culture? I have. I lived there for three years as a teen ager when my father was stationed in Rio de Janeiro. I would not present myself as an expert on a country larger than the continental US and I would not presume to judge the president. But I do know something about how complex Brazilian culture is and the paradoxical relationship between Brazilians and the Catholic church. When the pope visited Brazil recently he lectured the Brasileiros on sexual ethics. The response was that they pretty much ignored him and will continue to live the way they live. Believe me, if the pope can't make Brasileiros toe the Roman Catholic line I doubt that Lulu would stand a chance. It would take overcoming hundreds of years or blended European, Indian and African cultures and religions. When I lived in Brazil it was ruled by a military dictatorship. I visited a couple of years ago and believe me under Lulu's leadership the the average Brazilian is in much better shape.

 

TheScout, you say you will be traveling overseas soon. Please do so with an open mind. One of our worst traits as a nation is that we tend to visit other countries and tell them what is wrong with them. Oddly, others do not find this an endearing quality. Please check your opinions and attitudes with your luggage. Try not to look at things through a filter, paleo-conservative or otherwise. Depending on where you are visiting you may learn a lot very quickly and you may actually find some of your beliefs challenged. Travel is a great way to learn about the world. If you are going to be spending any length of time in a foreign country, make an effort to learn the local language. Even if it is only hello, please and thank you. Doing so will benefit you in many ways and will improve the image of America in general.

 

Finally, OGE suggests that if travel is required to be truly educated the education is the provence of the elite. He may be right. Is being elite necessarily bad? You could also argue that a college education is required to be truly educated and that also makes education the provence of the elite as not all can afford to go to college. My question would be, what is wrong with being elite? That merely means the best. Isn't that what we want. I know many from humble backgrounds who have traveled the world either for work, military service or by saving their pennies. Does that make them elite? If so, is it bad? Would you say to a scout that he should not join OA or earn Eagle because it would make him elite? I hope not.

 

Hal