American Communist Med Students graduate

[highfihoney]

Draconian. Eerily similar to the Nazi view of the "impure" and "unclean".

The present day geographical region known as Iraq was once the heart of Mesopatamia, cradle to one of the four great civilizations of the ancient world.

The ruins of the ancient city of Babylon, which once housed the Hanging Garden of Babylon (one of the seven wonders of the ancient world) lies just fifty miles outside of the present day city of Baghdad.

WOW Really,i get the history channel on my tv too ya know ,who cares,not even close bub,explain to me how ancient Babylon has anything to do with the present day Iraq or with that having anything to do with benifiting the rest of the human's on this planet.

All that site represents is another stretch of earth for them to war & kill over,nothing more.

 

[Johnd]

I agree with the proverbial "an eye for an eye".

I also believe in our absolute right to first defense.

I believe when provoked, a "proportional response" is absolutely justified.

I believe if you're gonna fight, do it right, not halfa** as we have proven to do more than once in the past 40 years.

I believe it incredibily unfair to amass a whole culture, even race of people into one group in order to send them "back to the mudpit." You may want to ponder, and reconsider after cooling off.

 

[furrycute]

WOW Really,i get the history channel on my tv too ya know ,who cares,not even close bub,explain to me how ancient Babylon has anything to do with the present day Iraq or with that having anything to do with benifiting the rest of the human's on this planet.

All that site represents is another stretch of earth for them to war & kill over,nothing more.

I rather enjoy watching the History Channel. Do you?

If history teaches us anything, it is that all great powers rise and fall. Arrogance such as yours only hastens the fall from greatness.

 

[Johnd]

"It is said that Drakon himself, when asked why he had fixed the punishment of death for most offences, answered that he considered these lesser crimes to deserve it, and he had no greater punishment for more important ones."

At first glance, an intriguing statement.

On second glance, one could argue that an arbiter who fails to see (whether he is incapable or too lazy to distinquish the differences makes no difference for the sake of this argument) the different severities of different crimes is unfit to judge.

Furthermore, it seems to me that doling out the same penalty for a wide range of misdeeds tends to make the most serious crimes (rape, murder, other violent crimes) less serious. As a matter of public policy...not a good thing.

Otherwise, an intriguing post, Rock&Roll Ninja.

 

[highfihoney]

I agree with the proverbial "an eye for an eye".

I also believe in our absolute right to first defense.

I believe when provoked, a "proportional response" is absolutely justified.

I believe if you're gonna fight, do it right, not halfa** as we have proven to do more than once in the past 40 years.

I believe it incredibily unfair to amass a whole culture, even race of people into one group in order to send them "back to the mudpit." You may want to ponder, and reconsider after cooling off.

John,i am not mad but i am realistic.

Here is my whole theory on these savages & i refer to them as savages not because of color or religion,i refer to them as savages because they live in the dark ages,their religious beliefs are bordering on insanity & they as a people do not hold the same values as we do,live & let live is not a belief they hold now nor will they ever hold such beliefs,recorded history has proven that time after time.

In this country we have a policy in place to deal with people who would victimize our residents over & over again,its the 3 strikes & your out policy & it works great,how many more times must we as a country endure the madness that the Iraqi people have been proven over many decades to export around the globe,when can we finally say no more.

These people have been warring over the same issues for 10,000 years,they think nothing about killing their own neighbor just because they wear their turban in a different way,anybody who will take a human life over such trivial issues is without a shadow of a doubt a savage & not ever to be trusted,i lump all religious fanatics in the same boat as a viscous dog or a child molester,there are some people who will never do good & no amount of therapy will fix em.

I refer to their homeland as a mud pit because that is what they have made it,the whole state of Nevada was a mud pit but we turned it into liveable real estate,the mud pit they live in will always be a mud pit because they use their resources for weapons war & terror,their country will always be a mud pit because they use their technology & scientists to build nuclear programs not to further the quality of life of their own people,the Iraqi had the resources to build a nuclear plant but couldnt send running water to residents homes,its a mud pit of their own making & will always be a mud pit.

 

[highfihoney]

I rather enjoy watching the History Channel. Do you?

If history teaches us anything, it is that all great powers rise and fall. Arrogance such as yours only hastens the fall from greatness.

I love the history channel,its about all i can watch on tv without throwing up.

All great powers rise & fall due to the leadership of the country being blind to whats taking place in the present,the demise of the United States will come from the indecision of our leaders & residents,nothing more.

Failure to act quickly & decisively is ten times more devistating than making a bad decision,in business & in world affairs.

 

[Johnd]

John,i am not mad but i am realistic.

Here is my whole theory on these savages & i refer to them as savages not because of color or religion,i refer to them as savages because they live in the dark ages,their religious beliefs are bordering on insanity & they as a people do not hold the same values as we do,live & let live is not a belief they hold now nor will they ever hold such beliefs,recorded history has proven that time after time.

In this country we have a policy in place to deal with people who would victimize our residents over & over again,its the 3 strikes & your out policy & it works great,how many more times must we as a country endure the madness that the Iraqi people have been proven over many decades to export around the globe,when can we finally say no more.

These people have been warring over the same issues for 10,000 years,they think nothing about killing their own neighbor just because they wear their turban in a different way,anybody who will take a human life over such trivial issues is without a shadow of a doubt a savage & not ever to be trusted,i lump all religious fanatics in the same boat as a viscous dog or a child molester,there are some people who will never do good & no amount of therapy will fix em.

I refer to their homeland as a mud pit because that is what they have made it,the whole state of Nevada was a mud pit but we turned it into liveable real estate,the mud pit they live in will always be a mud pit because they use their resources for weapons war & terror,their country will always be a mud pit because they use their technology & scientists to build nuclear programs not to further the quality of life of their own people,the Iraqi had the resources to build a nuclear plant but couldnt send running water to residents homes,its a mud pit of their own making & will always be a mud pit.

Speaking of turbans...
How do you know when the sheik reaches puberty? When he takes the turban off his a** and wraps it on his head. Adolescent humor that is not meant to impune any race or culture...I just thought it appropriate here.

Highfihoney: I've read many of your posts. I agree with much of what you have said. BUT BE CAREFUL. It is not the "Iraqi people" committing terrorism around the world and which poses a threat to world order if left unchecked. It is an assorted group of terrorists from around the world: Iraq, Iran, Syria, the Phillipines, Great Britain, and yes, believe it or not, the good old U.S. of A.

 

[Davemcc]

I think the time is long overdue to create new, strong alliances rather than keep old enemies. It is precisely that type of paranoia (that China and Iran will establish military and naval bases in Cuba) that fosters ill will and an unwarranted fear of diplomacy.

Please do not underestimate the threat China poses to the United States. China has announced it's intention to annex Taiwan and has announced it's intention to conduct a nuclear war with the U.S. if it interferes. To make the point clear, China is currently building a new blue water naval fleet of nuclear carriers and hunter/killer subs as well a large fleet of amphibious assault vessels.

China will not negotiate on the issue of Taiwan, which is a free, democratic, capitalist nation and wishes to remain so. I prefer to think that the U.S. (maybe the U.N., but I won't hold my breath) will stand up and defend the lives and freedom of the Taiwanese. This becomes much easier if Cuba is not a client state of China.

1. The removal of Saddam was arguably necessary, I would not call it noble.
2. The establishment of a free, stable democracy is only noble if the majority of the citizens desire it...otherwise, we become usurpers trading a dictatorship for for an undesirable body politic. Not only is it hugely disrespectful to the citizens of that country, but certain to foster ill will, even hatred as these citizens continue to detest our presence and the imposition of our will. Do you not see the "potential" problem?
3. And how long do you think it takes to establish a "free, stable democracy" in a country that has never known it, and where an entire region rejects the entire principle of democracy? I will tell you it is not 5 1/2 years. The powers that be seemed to think (in 2002) that it could have been accomplished in a year or two. Let me help you. It takes many decades to establish a new stable government.

Here's where it gets sticky. I do believe that the vast majority of Iraqis wish to have a peaceful stable democracy and an American withdrawal will be an abandonment of those people. The "war" in Iraq is being conducted by a very small segment of the population, quite often by non-Iraqis or with foreign backing (read: Iranian). It is in a large way factional, a tribal power struggle, if you will. This is why we are seeing bombs set off in mosques and markets that have little or no American presence. Further, I don't think the "war" is so much directed at U.S. forces, except in the respect that they interfere with one factions attempts to kill the other. The Iraqi National Police are just as much a target as U.S. forces. It really is the foreign fighters that specifically target Americans for being Americans. It would be wrong to abandon the vast majority of the population that truly want freedom, peace and democracy to the hands of these factional leaders and foreign insurgents.

Much of my view of Iraq has been tempered by the owner of my local variety store. No stereotype here, he is an expatriate Iraqi, former officer in Saddam's army who deserted and came to Canada. He supports 100% the U.S. presence in Iraq for the safety and security of the family that he still has there. He says every time he calls home, another friend or somebody he knows has been killed, not by American forces, but by random shootings or bombings by one rival faction of another. He wants his family to live, freely and peacefully if possible, but mostly just to live and he sees the American presence as the best hope for that. It would be America's shame to abandon these people to the "animals" that HighFi refers to.

In reply to HighFi's post, it is not surprising that little of value has come from Iraq in the modern generation, since it has been ruled as an iron-fisted dictatorship by Saddam for decades prior to the current conflict. Such authoritarian regimes tend to stifle genius, creativity, experimentation and beauty. If we do not abandon Iraq, but rather support it as it develops into a peaceful democratic state, I truly believe that we can expect significant contributions from its people in academics, science, art, etc...

edit - Turbans are worn by Sikhs. To my knowledge, there are no wars or terrorism being conducted by Sikhs anywhere in the world. It is a peaceful religion and should be respected.

 

[furrycute]

Please do not underestimate the threat China poses to the United States. China has announced it's intention to annex Taiwan and has announced it's intention to conduct a nuclear war with the U.S. if it interferes. To make the point clear, China is currently building a new blue water naval fleet of nuclear carriers and hunter/killer subs as well a large fleet of amphibious assault vessels.

Taiwan has always been a part of China. The unification of Taiwan with mainland China is a Chinese domestic issue. China is the only country with nuclear capabilities to openly declare that the Chinese government will not use nuclear weapons on a preemptive basis.

As to the build up of the Chinese navy. China today is the only major country in the world without a blue water navy, and without a single carrier in its fleet.


And for your information, the nation of Japan, while equivalent in size to only one of China's provinces, maintains a navy several times the size of the Chinese navy and has an annual military budget that is twice that of China's. And just for the sake of comparison, the annual U.S. military spending exceeds the combined military expenditures of the rest of the world. China is hardly a credible military threat to the U.S.

 

[Johnd]

Taiwan has always been a part of China. The unification of Taiwan with mainland China is a Chinese domestic issue.

Ditto.

Furthermore, we only supported an independent Taiwan until it no longer served our purposes (1970"s). It was at that time that we finally recognized China and their right of sovereignity and self-preservation (because it that served our purpose). Like it or not, Chiang Kai Shek has been dead quite a while, and the Taiwanese issue is purely domestic.

 

[Johnd]

You know, it struck me (duh) that we have deviated wildly from the op's initial point, intriguing as it has been.

This whole post started about some left-wing, liberal American hippies that received a free medical education in Cuba. Damn them all to hell.

Apparently the point has been wholly lost that
"They plan to return home, take board exams for licenses to practice and provide cheap health care in poor neighborhoods."

How dare they! The scoundrels! Let's fry 'em all I say! Their intentions are pure evil, and even if they can provide cheap health care in poor neighborhoods" it's no good. They're commies!

We really should just allow our poor people to remain sick and die, whilst hating the very Cubans that afforded this opportunity. Patriotism!

 

[furrycute]

I don't know if everyone is aware of this, each year, we let in thousands of foreign medical school graduates into the U.S. for residency training and afterwards stay here to practice.

The majority of them come from India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, etc.

 

[Davemcc]

Ditto.

Furthermore, we only supported an independent Taiwan until it no longer served our purposes (1970"s). It was at that time that we finally recognized China and their right of sovereignity and self-preservation (because it that served our purpose). Like it or not, Chiang Kai Shek has been dead quite a while, and the Taiwanese issue is purely domestic.

Oh my God!!!

I can't believe people see this issue this way. When the communists took over China by military force, the legitimate democratic government of China fled to Taiwan and maintained it's democratic tradition. While no other nations had the power or will to fight the communists in China (vis-a-vis Vietnam and Korea) the communists did not have the power to take over Taiwan. The status quo has allowed Taiwan to develop into a free, democratic state independent of China. I can't believe in this day and age that anybody is willing to sell out a free democratic nation to the communists without resistance. Besides, since Taiwan was part of China and the government of Taiwan is the direct descendant of the legitimate government of China that was forcibly expelled from the mainland, one could argue that the government of Taiwan is the legitimate government of China and it's authority has been illegally usurped by the military force of the communists. I'm not sure if you are saying that might makes right, and if the communists are stronger than the democratic government, that they deserve the whole prize, that we'll just throw Taiwan in as a gift?

But it still astounds me that anybody would give away a free society to communist repression.

Just for the record, China has not been a global military power, but is currently undergoing a massive buildup. Here's a taste: http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.60/pub_detail.asp

edit - I think tomorrow we need to discuss moral equivalence and the differences between communist and democratic societies. Perhaps then you will see why I despise communist nations so much, but now I need to go to work.

 

[stratman]

I pledge allegiance to the United Nations,
All countries under and subservient to one,
I plegde to forget what my fellow Americans have done,
Their lives and blood for naught,
One nation amongst many, not as important as any,
Raise one flag, the Blue and White,
Forget the Red of our sacrifice.

I pledge my soul to thee, do with me as you please,
Here's my first born do to his mind as you wish,
One world united for all, to serve mankind above all.


All I can say is: I'd rather be dead.

 

[furrycute]

Oh my God!!!
I can't believe people see this issue this way.

The division between Taiwan and mainland China is the unresolved legacy of a civil war that was fought over sixty years ago. Regardless of what your political stance is, the eventual unification between Taiwan and mainland China remains a Chinese domestic matter.


And regarding China's modernization of its navy. Most of China's naval hardware dates back to the 1960's and 1970's. They are at least 2 generations behind what are deployed by most Western nations today. So what is this rationale behind this fear mongering of China's modernization of its navy?

 

[Buckle-meister]

I pledge allegiance...

It's really no different to the American Oath of Allegiance. Both are simply a collection of words. Both are mouthed by people. Neither guarantees the person will follow through.

Actions will always speak louder than words.

 

[Davemcc]

And regarding China's modernization of its navy. Most of China's naval hardware dates back to the 1960's and 1970's. They are at least 2 generations behind what are deployed by most Western nations today. So what is this rationale behind this fear mongering of China's modernization of its navy?

You obviously didn't read my link, did you?

Quote - "China can be credited for having significantly closed the gap in nuclear submarine capabilities. But this achievement combined with the projected numbers of new Chinese submarines points to period of growing stress for the U.S. attack submarine fleet. In late 2003 China started building its third Type 093 SSN and some sources predict that six 093s and five to six 094s could be build by 2010. If true, this constitutes a rapid build-up of nuclear submarines."

Quote further - "By 2010 the U.S. could be facing a new PLAN [People's Liberation Army Navy] submarine fleet of about 10 SSNs, 5-6 SSBNs, and assuming the production of 5 Yuans, about 27 new very capable non-nuclear submarines. In addition, the PLAN may retain most of about 20 older but still effective Type 035 "Ming" class non-nuclear submarines, for a potential total approaching 50 to 60 attack submarines alone. Today the U.S. Navy only has 55 attack submarines to cover its global security commitments. Shockingly, there were suggestions from within the Navy in early 2004 that this fleet could be reduced to 37 in order to pay for newer submarines.[9] While three Los Angeles class SSNs have been moved to Guam, this is only sufficient to support one submarine continuously deployed. According to some sources budget cutters apparently reduced this number from six. However, China’s projected submarine fleet build-up makes the current U.S. SSN fleet of 55 SSNs seem inadequate."

Here Furrycute, try these links. They are more your speed. Not a lot of reading, but plenty of pretty pictures.
http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/planbuildup.htm
http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/2007.htm

 

[Johnd]

Oh my God!!!

I can't believe people see this issue this way.

As I wrote, despite my sympathies for them, were it not for our vacillating loyalties (first to Taiwan for several decades, and now to China for the last few decades), I feel it is a purely domestic issue.

It is akin to some separatists expatriating to Ellis Island, and China imposing their will on us. Unfortunate as it is, it is a domestic issue.

 

[Davemcc]

It is akin to some separatists expatriating to Ellis Island, and China imposing their will on us. Unfortunate as it is, it is a domestic issue.

NOT.

It is akin to the Chinese arming a communist revolution and chasing the President of the United States, Congress, Senate and Supreme Court to Ellis Island, then by having conquered America by force of arms claiming that Ellis Island should also belong to them.

Domestic issue my rear end. After fifty years of successfully operating an independent, free and democratic nation, Taiwan has earned the support and recognition of the other free and democratic nations to prevent it's enslavement at the hands of the communists that used force of arms to take the rest of China.

Johnd, let me summarize what I have learned of your foreign policy goals.

The U.S. should not protect or support current or fledgling democracies if there might be conflict.

There is no inherent difference between communism and democracy. It doesn't matter what political system controls a nation.

We should not defend America's continental security from hostile nations. In fact, we should support the economies of our enemies.

We should compromise with our enemies and give them some of what they need to hurt us.

We should subvert American national interests to a consensus of foreign nations.

Threats to national security will go away if we pretend they don't exist.

I think that covers it pretty well.

 

[Johnd]

NOT.

It is akin to the Chinese arming a communist revolution and chasing the President of the United States, Congress, Senate and Supreme Court to Ellis Island, then by having conquered America by force of arms claiming that Ellis Island should also belong to them.

Domestic issue my rear end. After fifty years of successfully operating an independent, free and democratic nation, Taiwan has earned the support and recognition of the other free and democratic nations to prevent it's enslavement at the hands of the communists that used force of arms to take the rest of China.

Johnd, let me summarize what I have learned of your foreign policy goals.

The U.S. should not protect or support current or fledgling democracies if there might be conflict.

There is no inherent difference between communism and democracy. It doesn't matter what political system controls a nation.

We should not defend America's continental security from hostile nations. In fact, we should support the economies of our enemies.

We should compromise with our enemies and give them some of what they need to hurt us.

We should subvert American national interests to a consensus of foreign nations.

Threats to national security will go away if we pretend they don't exist.

I think that covers it pretty well.

No, not even close bud (in the words of the great highfi, and that movie from the 80's). Oversimplification at its' finest.

For some reason you refuse to discuss our vacillating support of first Taiwan...then China. This turncoat loyalty of ours has formed a large basis of my opinion on whether or not we now have any right to intervene.