Arabs Gone Wild

It seems like the people of egypt will get hustled they will get rid of their president but not their problem. their military is still in control and i'm pretty sure we control their military the suez canal is still open. the people might get a new president and some more food and they will calm down but were still going to be sending 1.3 billion a year and the people are still going to be getting shot with made in the U.S.A. tear gas. they won't win but we will be made to think they scored a victory for freedom

They were fighting on camels

ow they got some guns...theirs some shooting now...that took awhile

They kind of suck at this over their...all this hype their throwing rocks and shit. The military doesn't even bother because their so lame. way more killed in the U.S. and Mexico than this, why all the hype

beardo said:

They kind of suck at this over their...all this hype their throwing rocks and shit. The military doesn't even bother because their so lame. way more killed in the U.S. and Mexico than this, why all the hype

Click to expand...

Any one else dissapointed in these peoples lack of effectiveness?

I'll say this..........

My timeline is looking pretty much spot on.

Better or worse.

M*slim Br*therhood?

Tic toc, tic toc,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

stand the hell by

[youtube]9vQaVIoEjOM[/youtube]

beardo said:

Any one else dissapointed in these peoples lack of effectiveness?

Click to expand...

this guy had control of Egypt for 30 years. our current and prior presidents were wearing diapers and learning how to read when this guy became the ruler of his nation.

it took less than a month to drive him out of power.

lack of effectiveness???

there's been lack of deaths, but the message got through. unless you somehow tabulate the effectiveness of a movement by the amount of deaths said movement causes.... b/c if that's the case then you are just a sad, sad individual......

Dan Kone said:

The point is that it's pretty bad, but the best system we have.

Click to expand...

...said the three wolves to the sheep when deciding what would be for dinner.

Rob Roy said:

...said the three wolves to the sheep when deciding what would be for dinner.

Click to expand...

So do you think we would be better off if we had a military dictatorship? Yeah, didn't think so. When you invent a better system of government get back to us with that. Until then we will make due with what we've got.

Dan Kone said:

So do you think we would be better off if we had a military dictatorship? Yeah, didn't think so. When you invent a better system of government get back to us with that. Until then we will make due with what we've got.

Click to expand...

First we'd have to define "best" . Is there a universal best ? For me the best government is the least oppressive government, one that allows me to pursue those things I wish as long as I respect others right to the same. Within those simple constraints self government seems much more favorable than democracy.

I don't like any dictatorship. Either a dictatorship of one or a dictatorship of many, as democracies can be. Who is "us" ? Who is "we" ? I can only speak for me.

If a person isn't self governed, they must be governed by another or others wouldn't you say? Democracy seems like a race to allow a majority the ability to control a minority...how is that fair for the persons in the minority?

Rob Roy said:

First we'd have to define "best" . Is there a universal best ? For me the best government is the least oppressive government, one that allows me to pursue those things I wish as long as I respect others right to the same. Within those simpe constraints self government seems much more favorable than democracy.

I don't like any dictatorship. Either a dictatorship of one or a dictatorship of many, as democracies can be. Who is "us" ? Who is "we" ? I can only speak for me.

If a person isn't self governed, they must be governed by another or others wouldn't you say? Democracy seems like a race to allow a majority the ability to control a minority...how is that fair for the persons in the minority?

Click to expand...

Bob Heironimus, you have it right on this

Rob Roy said:

First we'd have to define "best" . Is there a universal best ? For me the best government is the least oppressive government, one that allows me to pursue those things I wish as long as I respect others right to the same. Within those simple constraints self government seems much more favorable than democracy.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by self government? Anarchy? lol. gtfo

Dan Kone said:

What do you mean by self government? Anarchy? lol. gtfo

Click to expand...

Hers's what I mean Dan....

I mean the absence of a central authority that can and does arbitrarily initiate force against people that have harmed no other.

I mean that every PEACEFUL individual has a right to their thoughts, their body, their property, their labor, their actions that don't harm another.

I mean no person or group of persons has a right to initiate force against another person when they are exercising the rights described above.

Can I assume you favor systems that approve of the use of force against others over what I have just described as being "better" ?
How so?

When you are done laughing, please tell me if you personally prefer to make choices in your life or if you prefer to hand those decisions over to somebody else. Tell me where you or another person derives the authority to make another persons choices for them ?

If an individual has no authority to impose on another individual's right to be left alone how can a group of individuals, "a democracy" somehow acquire that authority absent the use of force?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dan Kone said:

What do you mean by self government? Anarchy? lol. gtfo

Click to expand...

Check out russel Meens on common law, or neighbor hoods.
Its pretty much come to an agreement with your neighbors and don't be a dick

Rob Roy said:

Hers's what I mean Dan....

I mean the absence of a central authority that can and does arbitrarily initiate force against people that have harmed no other.

Click to expand...

my bad. I thought you were talking about something else.

I mean that every PEACEFUL individual has a right to their thoughts, their body, their property, their labor, their actions that don't harm another.

I mean no person or group of persons has a right to initiate force against another person when they are exercising the rights described above.

Can I assume you favor systems that approve of the use of force against others over what I have just described as being "better" ?
How so?

Click to expand...

Nah. That sounds good to me. But the way to get that is democracy. Democracy might not always result in that, but that's the best chance. Do you know a better way?

beardo said:

Check out russel Meens on common law, or neighbor hoods.
Its pretty much come to an agreement with your neighbors and don't be a dick

Click to expand...

And who enforces that? What happens if a majority of your neighbors decide to be dicks?

Dan Kone said:

And who enforces that? What happens if a majority of your neighbors decide to be dicks?

Click to expand...

^^^ This is what I ask myself every election year
If you think all your neighbors are dicks you should probably move. but if you think everyone else is an asshole the truth is probably that you are the asshole.
the idea of it is if someones stealing your shit you shoot him...if someone is stealing your neighbors shit you shoot them...and you come to agreements about what is and is not acceptable in your neighborhood

beardo said:

^^^ This is what I as myself every election year
If you think all your neighbors are dicks you should probably move. but if you think everyone else is an asshole the truth is probably that you are the asshole.
the idea of it is if someones stealing your shit you shoot him...if someone is stealing your neighbors shit you shoot them...and you come to agreements about what is and is not acceptable in your neighborhood

Click to expand...

Which is nice until one neighborhood decides they wants your neighborhoods stuff so they attack your neighborhood. Personally, I like the fact that I don't have to shoot people or go to war with other neighborhoods. But that's just me...

Dan Kone said:

Which is nice until one neighborhood decides they wants your neighborhoods stuff so they attack your neighborhood. Personally, I like the fact that I don't have to shoot people or go to war with other neighborhoods. But that's just me...

Click to expand...

That's pretty much what the military and the wars are.If I had to be involved in and dispute I would rather fight over or finance a fight over something that mattered to me and the people closest to me