Thread: Whats your opinion on automatic weapons?

Originally Posted by BobH

Sorry I don't have a good education being a high school drop out and yes I do think that some Americans, certainly not all, have a myopic view of history. There were a lot of parts of the British empire that gained nation hood status at very different times. Canada got that in 1867, much later than the US and by a different route. You are happy with how you did it and I am content with the way we did it. There is no reason why things can't be done differently and no amount of lecturing that anyone would be better off emulating the way some other country does things things will help either. I do not advocate you emulate anyone but yourselves.

There were quite a few colonial powers involved in the middle east and elsewhere. IIRC the terms of the Treaty of Versailles carved up the middle east to suit the victorious signatory powers, the US being among them. So you don't get away scot free there either. Yea, it could have been handle more wisely but it was not.

Colonialism is still alive and well but it does not take the shape of it's former self. No need to physically invade and occupy a country. That is done by other means today.

Bob

Thanks for responding. I get what you're saying.

I think modern colonialism is close to back where it started in the 1600s with the British East India Company and their Dutch equivalent, the VOC (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie). Talk about monopolies! These corporations controlled a huge share of all European trade with India, Southeast Asia and China for almost 200 years... Nowadays, we have the energy, arms, tech and pharmaceutical sectors conquering the world, with banking ruling over all, and everyone wearing Chinese underpants and socks - yep, colonialism sure has changed!

Re the Middle East, not to argue, just to clarify: Essentially France and the UK drew up the boundaries of the Middle East as we know it today and split the territory (Syria and Lebanon to France, Palestine and the three provinces of Mesopotamia, which became today's Iraq, to the Brits). The League of Nations, which the US was a member of, signed off on this "mandate of control". However, direct US interest and influence in the region was not a huge factor until after WW II, but then rapidly increased: Oil, oil, oil, Cold War strategic bases, and protection of the new State of Israel. So yeah, no one gets off scot-free!

Only on little quibble, the treaty was basically put together by Britain, France and the US over a 6 month period and signed before the League of Nations came into being. The basis for trouble in the mid east is typified by the redrawing of borders and forming countries with no regard for the inhabitants original traditional territorial areas. That and exploitation by the west for a great long time created a bubbling caldron which eventually made the spawning of today's terrorists possible. You reap what you sow eventually and no that is NOT repeat NOT an endorsement of terrorism just a recognition of how we collectively got to this point. It really should come as no surprise that people feeling repressed over an extended period of time should eventually arm themselves and resist what they perceive as repression. Isn't that not how the USA was founded.

Bob

Originally Posted by Wullie

Ban guns and outlaw them?

No problem!
Фабрика по производству оружия

Don't let the funny looking Russian link scare you.

And then there is this.
Война племён

That one link reminds me of what the old-timer down at the gun shop told me. He said the British could not keep railroad tracks down in Afganistan back in the day. The locals would pry them up and make guns out of them!

Originally Posted by BobH

Well, you may never have had Kings and Queens and such but don't kid yourself you have powerful people in your country with the same attitude. How else would you explain the antics of CEOs and their ilk that implies a divine right to behave the way they do. Even a supposed classless society is not classless. I think we just replace one type of subjugation with another less readily visible one.

Bob

Any when those CEO's get out of hand we take all their money away and put them in jail.

Can you say Bernie Madoff?

Originally Posted by Crotalus

Any when those CEO's get out of hand we take all their money away and put them in jail.

Can you say Bernie Madoff?

Well with Bernie you did get it right but he was not hiding behind huge corporations and had little protection. It is little things like the heads of the big three each taking their own corporate jet to fly down and beg for money. Just a bit nervy considering the circumstances and gives you a pretty good idea as to what they think they are entitled to come heck or high water. How about Wall Streets little fiascoes when bailout money was given and the higher ups handed out bonuses to themselves and could not understand the public out cry. This all after they crippled if not destroyed many peoples retirement funds and rocked the world economy to the point where it has not recovered fully yet. Seems to me to reflect a certain divine right of entitlement that formerly was the purview of Kings and Queen and landed gentry.

Bob

Originally Posted by sharptonn

That one link reminds me of what the old-timer down at the gun shop told me. He said the British could not keep railroad tracks down in Afganistan back in the day. The locals would pry them up and make guns out of them!

I can't get either of those links to work for me. I guess we aren't so free under the Queens Prime Minister of Australia. It seems we a have some Censering going on. Unless another Australian can tell me that they got the links to work, I'm left with little else to believe.


Mick

Originally Posted by BobH

Only on little quibble, the treaty was basically put together by Britain, France and the US over a 6 month period and signed before the League of Nations came into being. The basis for trouble in the mid east is typified by the redrawing of borders and forming countries with no regard for the inhabitants original traditional territorial areas. That and exploitation by the west for a great long time created a bubbling caldron which eventually made the spawning of today's terrorists possible. You reap what you sow eventually and no that is NOT repeat NOT an endorsement of terrorism just a recognition of how we collectively got to this point. It really should come as no surprise that people feeling repressed over an extended period of time should eventually arm themselves and resist what they perceive as repression. Isn't that not how the USA was founded.

Bob

Well, I wasn't there on the camel with T.E. Lawrence and Co., but according to the following, from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=3860950:

With the onset of WWI, the French and the British sent armies and agents into the Middle East, to foment revolts in the Arabian Peninsula and to seize Iraq, Syria and Palestine. In 1916, French and British diplomats secretly reached the Sykes-Picot agreement, carving up the Middle East into spheres of influence for their respective countries. That agreement was superceded by another which established a mandate system of French and British control, sanctioned [1923] by the new League of Nations [founded 1919]...

You are right in that the various interests of the industrialized West since WW I or so contributed to creating the environment that has helped foment fundamentalist Islam and terrorism, but let's not forget the Nazis (yes, them) and their buddies the Muslim Brotherhood, the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, the iron-fisted Kingdom of Saud, Qadafi, the Hussein regime, the Assad family, hard-core Zionists and other choice participants in the dance. Even further than that, the roots of conflict go back to the Crusades and beyond, to the 7th Century tribal warfare out of which Islam and its various factions were born. Two excellent books on the past and present of the Middle East are Karen Armstrong's "The Crusades" and "The History Of God". Another excellent perspective on the roots of terrorism, which I've read several times now, is John Grey's "Al Qaeda And What It Means To Be Modern". Fascinating stuff!

HamburgO

I stand corrected on the partitioning of the mid east post WW1. Never too old to learn.

So I guess we can possible deduce that basically religion of the extreme variety and politics are the root cause of most of mankind's ills in the broadest sense. Again nobody escapes culpability, we have all been guilty in some form at one time or another. No surprise there either.

Bob

Originally Posted by bharner

It usually involves some begging on my part but they're pretty awesome when she gets around to making them.

Why does it seem that every aspect of marriage includes begging on the man's part? And my friends wonder why I never got married!

Originally Posted by mapleleafalumnus

Why does it seem that every aspect of marriage includes begging on the man's part? And my friends wonder why I never got married!

Not always so, got lucky the second time around.

Bob