Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government

So now defense is a moral issue ?

Nope, you didn't answer my question, at all.

 

Do you know what the bill of rights is? How is invading Iraq or sticking our nose into the internal affairs of other countries defense? You're know different than the most liberal, left wing socialist in Washington. You think the constitution is a means to an end and not an end in itself.

 

Do you know what the bill of rights is? How is invading Iraq or sticking our nose into the internal affairs of other countries defense?</font>[/QUOTE] When the bill of rights was written the US literally had months to prepare once another country indicated aggression. Sneak attacks with devastating impact were impossible. The most destructive weapons available couldn't take down a small building with one shot much less a whole city or state.

We now live in a time where defense must start with prevention/preemption. Weapons are very efficient, portable, and much more difficult to detect.

A crew of two can sail a ship up the Hudson and detonate an atomic weapon. One person can contaminate the drinking water of millions. Look at 9/11, the founders had no concept of that type of sudden destructive power.

I agree with you about our gov't's abuses domestically. But gov't must defend its people... and I find no reason to believe that isolationism will work with governments premised on any philosophy that doesn't show preeminant respect for the rights and liberties of the individual... including Islamofacists.

The founders had a big world that separated them from aggressors.... we no longer have that luxury.

 

When have we ever tried "isolationism". BTW, it works very well when tried. The Swiss are a fine example of foreign policy.

 

We tried isolationism right before WWII. In fact, FDR was very frustrated that it was such a pervasive sentiment.

The Swiss? The Swiss have the luxury of being idealistic about it. They sit in the shade of the umbrella we provide and complain that we are too noisy in grooming the tree.

IOW's, they can afford to be isolationists because we aren't.

FTR, Swiss neutrality during WWII is a myth. They had concentration camps and their large German majority were sympathetic to Germany. Their tradition of neutrality may have kept them from officially taking a side... but they still took a side to the extent that they could.

Oh, I don't think you would be all that pleased with the control and policing that the Swiss have either.

 

Has Chavez eliminated nearly a whole race of people? Last I heard, he shipped cheap heating oil to poor people up in the Bronx, the cad.

 

He wants to bring us down, Daisy. Cheap publicity stunts aside. Bringing our government down means our end. He is an enemy. Him sending heating oil doesn't change that.

Besides, in 2000 alone, he was the recipient of over $70,000,000 U.S. dollars. That didn't seem to change his view of us.

 

No other nation will bring down the USA. We'll bring ourselves down by trying to make other nations like us and by not closing our borders to illegal aliens. The chasm between liberal and conservative values may well lead our nation to another civil war, and if that occurs, we'll just become another third-world nation ourselves.

 

Stalin did not need a revolution: that had already happened. Stalin was elected by near-unanimity by Communist Party members, the only ones allowed to vote.

As for the near-hysterical comments concerning presidential; abuse of authority, the Constitution is not a suicide pact (can't recall who stated that). To permit the ACLU to dictate the execution of war policy, via constant lawsuits, is to swallow poison and hope it kills the terrorists. Not a strategy to win!

 

Abe Lincoln, I believe.

 

Chaves needn't bother to try to "take our government down" public private parnerships are already well on their way to doing just that with the UN charter, Earth Charter, agenda 21, sustainable development, Kelo and the Davos world economic forum.

Our constitutional form of government is being systematically replaced with soviet style regional government and fascism.

 

Yes they were. As was Saddam... consistently. </font>[/QUOTE]Neither Stalin nor Saddam were democratically elected. You know that. I know that. Why do you persist with your straw-man?

 

Actually the real funny thing is when a leftist/socialist takes advantage of the fears and ignorance of the poor... it is called democracy and justice. But God forbid- let a company give a poor, uneducated person a job and its called exploitation. </font>[/QUOTE]Ah, yes, the right-wing US version of 'democracy': everyone has the right to vote for the government of our choice. And when the poor make the 'wrong' choice, they're 'fearful and ignorant'

 

Or in the pre emptive bomb sights.

 

You know, both Matt and Scott are right.

We need to stop presuming that only governments of our choosing are democratic.

Likewise, we need to stop presuming that just because an employee is poor or uneducated, his company must somehow be exploiting him.