Does the goverment have rights to penalis those it - Page 4

"nazi facism if u will recall had a bursting economy, the reason they could afford to spend so much on an almost brand new military and invasion projects of all the countrys it took."
The German economy was verging on collapse. Hitler was more adept at making people get the impression problems were gone then actually solving them. The cruises for workers, jobs by building the autobahn only distracted people from the problems but did act as a form of relief. What's more Hitler's laws on agriculture effectively protected the farmers but reduced them serfs forever attached to a piece of land.
The reason Hitler's war production was maintained to a reasonable level (which was FAR FAR behind the USA and USSR) was a combination of Germany's size and the use of all Europe's resources (France, USSR, Spain, Sweden, Romania were giving extensive aid to Germany at one point or another). The reason Germany did conquer at first without Europe's resources was the weakness of Western leaders and the skill of the top German generals (Guderian, Rommel).

"Communism i agree takes time, its economy would stay stable untill it increased with better standards of living and so on."
The soviet experiment (not to mention the chinese, yugoslavian, cuban and north korean experiments) showed that communism does not allow the same growth a free market does. Communism leads to overwhelming bureaucracy (sp?). Even leading communist leaders realised this, with the opening of chinese markets and Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika.

"The difference of communist russia and nazi germanys economy can be clearly seen to out weigh that of democratic britain at the time of the ww2,"
Britain did not operate like a real democracy. Or rather, britain did, but the british empire was clearly undemocratic. The british empire did not allow the Indians and Africans to be educated and lead productive lives. Thus British productivity was limited to Britain's rather small population.

"weimar goverment, that germany went into hyperinflation"
Very true. Your right that democracies are at first unstable and prone to dictatorships. But they're the best we have and have the brightest potential. Consistently in history, democracies left to their own die, but as soon as the free market is up and running, democracy is the most stable and allows the most freedom. S.Korea, Japan, France, W.Germany (W.Europe for that matter) all show that.
But yes, your right, democracies aren't perfect, and left to fend for themselves they seldom last long.

very impressive recall..... an exeptional argument but when i mean britain i dont mean its dominion, which it dealt with according to alot of rasist veiws in the goverment and population, racism and undemocratic means should never be thought as the same thing.
Goverments still have a bit to go to achieve a perfection but there still is an issue with the leaders of a goverment, even a facist goverment can prosper with the rights leaders. I share the veiw that democracys are right at this moment the most stable of goverments after they have run for a while. This begs the quistion what would be a "perfect" or near-perfect goverment? A mix of democracy with communism? or perhaps a republic coinciding with an aristocracy?

Well I think the prob in America and Europe is that undemocratic factors taint our democracies. In America, corporate money and the funding needed to run for president hinder American democracy.
In Europe (and more specifically France/Germany) decisions are influenced far too much by strikes, road blockades etc..
In America this means that the upper classes benefit more then they should and in Europe it means the trade unions (a minute 8 percent of the pop.) have a huge influence on decision making.

Are democracies need improving, which is perhaps why they seem so unappealing.

thats true, its cuase of these factors whihc make people welcome the things like communism and facism even tho they are worse people will go for it because its not the democracy with the fualts that they are living in at the present time

But democracy wont work when it comes to the UN.
America is immune to war crimes. If the UN tries to accuse them of something they will just threaten to pull out the funding for the UN. (about 60% of funding is American)
And then the UN would all....
If we have a democracy their should be something to govern the democracy.....
Like a honor system

EDIT: Spelling >.<

Well the UN aint a democracy.
But the reason it can't get anything done is because it has no power.
If it were a country, it would be an American Satellite.

A merica are is the ost powerful country right and one of the most devious civilisations that could ahve been great, america destroyed ( cuba , afhganistan) all in the name of supremecy. Britain, france the UN and the rest wont stand up to them but appease them and assist them in there plots. We appeased hitler once and ww2 started, What will be the consequences if America is just appeased untill they gain even more confidence to take more extreme measures?

Note that those countries supportive of US, are those which are capitalist,more socialist countries are more non-supportive. That we we seem to favor freeing other countries from the tranny which have something we desire. Cubans fleeing Cuba are welcomed if they reach our shores while Haitians face deportation . . . I guess Haiti doesn't have anything worthy of our taking?
( Spelling edit: Sorry I couldn't spell haiti correctly but then it has little consequence anyway.)

America isnt devious!!!!!
The government is!!! Damn the government conspiracies

ok well the "american" goverment is deviosue but is a country actually a country without a goverment to run it and uphaled its national identity

"Note that those countries supportive of US, are those which are capitalist,more socialist countries are more non-supportive. "
That has little or nothing to do with it. If Spain and Poland supported the US its because they knew that the US can be a friend, and a rich one at that. Islamic countries condemn it for religion not economic policies. France and Germany condemn it because they have interests in Iraq (Saddam owed them money/they were making money of the oil/food program) and in the case of Chirac allowed him to be more popular with the french (he took the peacemaker pose).

Teen, I watched an old movie last night which starred a younger version of Robert Redford. The plot revolved about the CIA and Arabic Oil, His best line stated how we (USA, government, CIA) Seem to have the appinion that Lies being accepted by the people is the same as being truthful?
Living a Lie isn't acceptable for me; we supported a tyrant in Iran to keep the area (oil fields) unstable, we went into Nam to promote capitalism not democracy, we are in Iraq for these same reasons.

Nam was a different time. Although the Vietnam war was clearly anti-democratic, it needs to be put into the context of the Cold War. Many American politicians seriously believed the soviets were out for world domination, Vietnam was about stopping the Red Tide, not making money (Nam was piss poor, there was no hope of it ever being profitable while keeping a permanent military presense).

"we are in Iraq for these same reasons."
Now perhaps Bush went into Iraq with the sole purpose of profiteering. I find this doubtful given the cost of the war.

"Seem to have the appinion that Lies being accepted by the people is the same as being truthful? "
Now it is true that Bush misused evidence, bent the truth and generally blew things out of proportion, this is not legitimate unless national security is at stake.
Bush is paying for this now.

america hae no interest in democracy, they use it as a front to make all there actions seem rightouse.. the training of mexican torture police, the support of poll pot and the condeming and sabataging of cuba, the torturing of thousands all over south america and europe, has anyone ever read rogue state by that ex american goverment official. America has to be stoped and soon cuase it aint gonna be democracy or capitalism we live in itll be americanism, anything alternative will either be assimilated or destroyed

quote:

---

Many American politicians seriously believed the soviets were out for world domination, Vietnam was about stopping the Red Tide,

---

Nam was about cutting off China's food supply in order to enforce US policies (capitalism) upon the largest communist country!
Iraq is about maintaining our oil supply, the most significant factor upon which modern capitalism must maintain (increase) to promote profit. Even if all terrorist were to be killed or incarsurated, the rate of growth and consumption is rapidly depleting the supply which is the death nails for our type of society.Our greatest threat is our own gluttony, a byproduct of our economic system.