Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Eternity · 26-30, M
I never did like that original quote.
1) it was said by one of the most privileged people to ever live . His country did a whole lot for him.
2) i would think that, based on the mythical social contract, being subject to the arbitrary rules and whims of a nation since birth would entitle a person to a certain amount of service from said nation.
If not then why are any of us going through these motions again? State of nature anyone? It would be dangerous, but so is this. At least it would be fair 🤷🏽♂️.
1) it was said by one of the most privileged people to ever live . His country did a whole lot for him.
2) i would think that, based on the mythical social contract, being subject to the arbitrary rules and whims of a nation since birth would entitle a person to a certain amount of service from said nation.
If not then why are any of us going through these motions again? State of nature anyone? It would be dangerous, but so is this. At least it would be fair 🤷🏽♂️.
View 1 more replies »
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Reason10 · 70-79, M
@Eternity
If you voted for Obama or for Biden, I'd say precedent is the ONLY criteria you used.
In this speech? The words "socialist" and "destablizing" couldn't be found. About the only thing he said in the realm of anything adversarial...
Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.
We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.
But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course--both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.
Excuse me, but this sounds like he was trying to beg the rest of the world to not engage in a nuclear arms race.
The United States Constitution's Bill Of Rights is a nice long list of LIMITATIONS on centralized power. It doesn't get any better than this country, as far as that goes.
As far as the speech not aging well, the reputation of JFK was unable to age well, thanks to a Soviet Union/Cuba loyalist named Lee Harvey Oswald. Jack cut taxes and the economy of the Sixties SOARED. That fact was covered up by his assassination.
Also, he doesn't get either credit or blame for involving America in the Vietnam War, mostly because historians just can't leave that Dallas chapter out of it.
Point 1: precedent doesnt make something right.
If you voted for Obama or for Biden, I'd say precedent is the ONLY criteria you used.
Lots of pretty words about destabilizing socialist nations. Perhaps not the intention at the time but definitely what that turned in to.
In this speech? The words "socialist" and "destablizing" couldn't be found. About the only thing he said in the realm of anything adversarial...
Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.
We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.
But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course--both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.
Excuse me, but this sounds like he was trying to beg the rest of the world to not engage in a nuclear arms race.
[quote]I'm not a fan of centralized power man. Not gonna lie.
[/quote]The United States Constitution's Bill Of Rights is a nice long list of LIMITATIONS on centralized power. It doesn't get any better than this country, as far as that goes.
As far as the speech not aging well, the reputation of JFK was unable to age well, thanks to a Soviet Union/Cuba loyalist named Lee Harvey Oswald. Jack cut taxes and the economy of the Sixties SOARED. That fact was covered up by his assassination.
Also, he doesn't get either credit or blame for involving America in the Vietnam War, mostly because historians just can't leave that Dallas chapter out of it.
in10RjFox · M
@Eternity that's the problem in today's world due to Media, as any nonsense of the past can be made a preamble or dogma, and declared untouchable, offering no scope for future to review.
In fact if we analyse the pledge of each country, we can see it is intended to program the minds of children for it is they who are made to recite it ever so often.
They have successfully managed to con parents to make babies only for them to be sent to school for being programmed by politicians.
What the hell is freedom of thought, speech when we have no say on our own future?
In fact if we analyse the pledge of each country, we can see it is intended to program the minds of children for it is they who are made to recite it ever so often.
They have successfully managed to con parents to make babies only for them to be sent to school for being programmed by politicians.
What the hell is freedom of thought, speech when we have no say on our own future?
WintaTheAngle · 41-45, M
Really? Propaganda for babies?
I’ll just let my kids be kids. Everyone should have have a childhood that was awesome. Mine was epic.
I’ll just let my kids be kids. Everyone should have have a childhood that was awesome. Mine was epic.
in10RjFox · M
@WintaTheAngle It's how a child mind gets programmed from childhood.
WintaTheAngle · 41-45, M
@in10RjFox They’re be no programming in this house.
Reason10 · 70-79, M
@WintaTheAngle I don't know why you would call it propaganda for babies, when they CANNOT READ at that age.
You could give them German selections from MEIN KAMPF (the Democrat Party bible) and they would understand just as much.
You could give them German selections from MEIN KAMPF (the Democrat Party bible) and they would understand just as much.
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
Too bad those kids are too young to read.
in10RjFox · M
@SumKindaMunster It's on TV. So there is audio and kids can pick up visuals and corelate.
Thevy29 · 41-45, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment